supreme court noted that the constitutional power to enforce our laws of the president does not imply that they can forbid their execution. president obama understood this when he admitted last year that "there are laws on the books that congress has passed, so the administration cannot just suspended deportations through executive order." president obama has broken this promise to the american people. this decision to grant administrative amnesty on a mass scale ignores the rule of law and the separation of power. when it illegal immigrants are allowed to live and work, an unemployed americans have to compete with them for scarce jobs. with 23 million americans unemployed or underemployed, this amnesty only makes their lives harder.

the administration pause and mystique is a magnet for fraud. many will claim they came to the u.s. as children and this administration refuses to take steps to check whether their claims are true or not. thdepartment of homeland security has gone out of its way to avoid the enforcement of immigration laws. the department policy of not enforcing will cause innocent americans their jobs. as secretary, you like all americans also must be concerned about the recent disclosure of national secrets. the methods of intelligence we used to protect security must be kept secret. when the secrets leak, american lives are threatened. recent damaging leaks include operational details of the bin laden raid, specifics about how we conduct cybersecurity, and information about drone strikes.

because of these, enemies now know how we will hunt them, which will make it more difficult. o met security depends on our ability to keep secrets from those who would attack our homeland. when they become public knowledge, people and our -- people and our national petition -- interests are in jeopardy. the ability to keep secrets depends on identifying causes and put a stop to them. that is why i have asked to interview officials that may have information about how secrets become public. the department has a responsibility to prevent terrorists from attacking. to do this we must protect the details of our intelligence gathering. that concludes my opening statement. the ranking member is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and well,, madam secretary. -- welcome, madam secretary. i wanted to do it off the

record, but i wanted to remind the chairman at his opinion is his own, but the facts are not the ones he controls. and i am keeping a record -- i want to announce to him -- of all the things that i think are serious misstatements of fact, which i will be taking either to the floor or publishing otherwise. i think i mentioned this to you before -- id.i'm sure you d given me think you have some work to do already. i would like to say it all members of the committee, i want this to be a civil hearing in which we exchange views, make criticisms, a voice opinions,

but i would like it be done in keeping with the reputation of the house judiciary committee, so we do not get out of control, and i am sure the chairman will agree with me on that. i welcome you, madam secretary, and i had some issues about some security incidents in detroit. and i would like night to take up our time talking about them here, but i would be looking forward to it, because the trucks, of course, the detroit- windsor tunnel is the largest commercial border crossing in north america, and these threats are of a concern, both to our country and to canada as

well. now, the other couple of things that i've wanted to commend you on it is the fact that we have improved border security, and having listened to some of my colleagues, i thought the border security on the southern end of our country was in bad shape. border security is more secure than it has ever been before, i think due to increased border enforcement efforts, and authorize the border crossings are at a 40-year low. we have not seen border

apprehension numbers this low since 1972. i commend homeland security for that. and if there are other insights that you would like to share with us today, and we have time, i would like to do it. if not, i would like to get more information from you or your staff. at the same time, immigration removals have been at an all- time high, just short of 400,000 last year. and what is more impressive is the makeup of the numbers. for the first time ever, persons with criminal convictions made up more than half of those removals, and more than 90% that

the administration's enforcement priorities, which includes recent border crossers and repeat violators. and so, even in the critical shortage of funds and personnel, i think that the strategies of your department are effecteive and are taking hold. the policy among -- in ice, in consultation with the civil rights and civil liberties office, has developed a new policy designed to protect victims of domestic violence and other crimes and ensure that they are reported. the dream act, a

conservative-created idea, which i support, has been very effective, and young people brought into this country to no fault of their own, and this is accepted by the citizenry, given that they go into service and graduate and do a few other things that indicate they want to be good americans like the rest of us, are given a special way to achieve their dream of citizenship. and so i thank you for coming back again, and i will put the rest of my statement in the record and thank the chairman for his generosity with the

time. >> without objection, thank you. with us today, janet napolitano, secretary of the department of homeland security. she is the third secretary of dhs. she was in her second term as governor of arizona prior to becoming secretary. she also served as attorney general of arizona and as u.s. attorney for the district of arizona. she is a graduate of santa clara university, where she won a truman scholarship. he received her tjuris degree in 1983. she also served for a clerk for a judge on the less certain of appeals and practiced law in phoenix. we look forward to your testimony, and please begin. >> thank you, others of the

committee. i am pleased to join you today to address the hope that security issues that fall within the committee's jurisdiction. this is now my 40th time testifying before either the senate or the house. today, nearly 11 years after the 9/11 attacks, ameritech is stronger and more secure thanks to the work of the men and women of dhs and our federal, state, local, travel, and territorial partners. every day more than 230,000 dhs employees ensure the safety of the american people in jobs that ranged from law enforcement officers and agents to disaster response coordinators', from those who make sure our waterways stay open to commerce, to those who make sure our skies remain safe. the men and women dhs are

committed and i think each one for their search. many times i have said homeland security begins with hometown security. as part of our commitment to strengthen hotel security, we have worked to get information, tools, and resources into the hands of state, local, travel, and territorial officials and first responders. this has led to significant advances. we have made progress in improving our domestic capability to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against our citizens, communities, and critical infrastructure. we have increased our ability to analyze and distribute threat information at all levels. we have invested in training for local law enforcement and first responders of all types in order to increase expertise and capacity at the local level, and we have supported and sustained preparedness and response capabilities across the country

through more than $36 billion in homeland security grants since 2002. as the committee knows, we have made substantial advances in securing our nation's borders and enforcing the immigration laws, and at the same time, we have worked to streamline the legal immigration process. in my time, i would like to discuss our efforts with respect to immigration, consistent with the committee bus jurisdiction over this issue for our country. as ranking member conyers noted, over the past 3 1/2 year, this administration has deployed unprecedented levels of resources to protect our nation 's borders. these efforts have achieved significant results, and illegal attends are at their lowest levels since 1971. this decrease in apprehensions of those seeking to enter the country illegally are one of the

best indicators of a tense is combined with increased seizures and drugs, weapons, cash, and contraband. to secure our nation's southwest border we have continued to deploy a president amounts of technology while expanding our relationships and partnerships with federal, state, tribal, territorial, and local partners as well as with the government of mexico. the obama administration has undertaken the most serious and sustained action to secure the southwest border in our nation's history. this includes increasing -- from approximately 10,000 in 2004 to more than 21,000 today. with nearly 18,500 boots on the ground and air coverage border white along the southwest border. we also have worked and continue

to work to enforce and administer our lost in a cohesive way that is smart, effective, and maximize the resources that congress has given us to do is important job. our priorities are to enhance public safety, national security, border security, and the integrity of the immigration system while respecting the role of law and stay true to our history as a nation of immigrants. we carry out these priorities by focusing our resources on the identification and removal of criminal aliens, repeat immigration by leaders come recent border entrance, and those who otherwise pose a threat public safety or national security. we have expanded the use and frequency of investigations and programs that track down criminals and other public safety and national security threats on our street, in our neighborhoods, and in our jails

trick these efforts have achieved historic results, including the removal of 216,000 convicted criminals in 2011, the highest number ever. this year we will remove the highest number of aggravated felons ever. furthermore, these efforts are enhanced by our use of prosecutorial discretion, ncluding june 15the announcement. these policies promote the use of our resources, insuring we do not divert them away from removal of convicted criminals by pursuing the removal of young people who came to this country as children and who have called no other country home. implementation of that deferred action process is under way, at the will be ready to accept applications on august 15. additionally, we have made numerous improvements that our

administration of immigration benefits and services, continuing our tradition as a welcoming patient to new immigrants, businesses, students, and those seeking refuge. this department has come along way, and in the nearly 11 years since 9/11, to engage the full range of partners in this responsibility. we have made significant progress to strengthen our borders cannot enforce immigration law, and improved and streamline our emigration processes and systems. but we are aware of challenges that remain. threats against our nation, whether by terrorism or otherwise, continue to exist and the ball. dhs must evolve as well. we continue to be ever vigilant to protect against threats to our nation while promoting the movement of goods and people at protection -- protecting our rights and liberties free, i

think the committee for your attention as we work together to keep the country safe, and i am looking forward to your questions. thank you. >> thank you, madam secretary. i will recognize myself for courses, and let me go first to the subject i mentioned, and that is the subject of the leaks that i feel have endangered our national security that put american lives at risk. as you know, there is bipartisan concern for those leaks. you have the chairs of the committee's both saying that the extent of these leaks are broader, deeper, more dangerous than any we have seen in recent years. have you had the opportunity to talk to the president and or his national security advisers about these leaks and how to prevent them in the future? >> i have spoken with that at of the dni about the leaks. he is leading an investigation,

as you know, but i take these very seriously. they do endanger homeland security. >> according to reports, it was high-level officials who were the source of these leaks. at the taken action to yourself to try to find out more they occurred and why high-level administration officials were involved? >> no, but others are looking into the source. >> do you favor the appointment of a special counsel to investigate these weeks? let me say before you answer that, when we had the incident of a single leak during the last bush administration, a special outside counsel. would you support such an outside counsel be appointed because of these recent leaks? >> there are a number of

individuals that are looking into the source of the leaks. i do not know it yet another one would add anything of value. >> let me explain. what the administration has done with a " individuals to investigate itself, how much, but the -- confidence the people will have that that will be an objective investigation when the administration is investigating itself. it would be more credible for the administration to appoint a special counsel to get to the bottom of the leaks, so i'm disappointed the administration is not willing to do that. let me go to the subject of the administration -- trying to implement some of the dream act provisions without a vote of congress, but the to the plate that is being implemented.

will individuals who have pending dream act applications be eligible for advance parole? i mentioned this to you earlier, but it is my understanding they will be eligible. >> this is a deferred action -- >> would individuals be eligible to receive that status who would be considered under these provisions? >> there may be particular individuals, but the program is designed to be an analysis only for deferred acts. there are so many individual factors that go into each case that i did not want to make a categorical answer. >> you said some individuals might be. that is of some concern because if they get that status, that is going to enable them to get

lawful permanent status, which is the path to citizenship. if you go down that road, as i think you may be going, i think we need to be aware of the consequences of those actions. >> if i might respond to that, the factors that go into this are the factors played out in my memorandum to our department heads on june 15. this is clearly a deferred action, case by case analysis. there may be factors independent of and separate from -- >> individuals will be eligible and that will put them on the pact to citizenship. the parents at individuals, those who receive a drink at amnesty, would they be eligible for prosecutorial discretion? >> they will not be eligible for a deferment, but deferred action, pursuant to my june 15 memorandum. they may independently be subject to an exercise of

prosecutorial discretion, should they have a case before us. >> last question, dhs does not plan to require dean and the state action plans to provide a certified school transcript. it seems that is the only way to prove those individuals were in the country and are eligible under some of these provisions. do you plan to require applicants to provide that certified school transcript or not? >> mr. chairman, we are working through the details of some of that. our plan is to accept different types of documents and do a fraud prevention effort -- >> how can you do that when i understand over 1000 individuals have been granted status under these provisions? >> we are working through the details of how someone who has applied through cis, what records they have to produce. i have had several individuals in the removal proceedings and

had looked at those -- >> is it true about a thousand individuals have been approved? >> for deferred action, yes. >> and we do not know if transcripts will be required? >> transcripts, medical records, anything to show residency, age, what have you, and we will evaluate on a case by case basis those documents -- >> the transcripts may or may not be required? >> that is fair to say. >> taken, -- thank you, madam secretary. >> thank you, secretary napolitano. i wanted to start out with the threats to that border crossing in detroit, windsor. other comments you can make about that at this point? >> excuse me? >> about the bomb threats that

have shut down the ambassador bridge in detroit and windsor for about five hours, and they are of national concern, and in my locality. do you have any information you could share with us at this point on -- >> let me just say that the fbi has an investigation there. we are providing all assistance necessary. we take this very seriously. e're also looking how long closures were to see if there are ways to more swiftly clear our bridge or tunnel for the lawful commerce that needs to go back and forth. >> thank you. the chairman of this committee mentioned amnesty twice, much

less than he usually does, but the dream act -- can you help us clear up this notion of some kind of deferred amnesty being involved in this, please? >> it is not amnesty. what it is is it is really the development that we have been looking at over the last several years how do we clear out the back lot of non priority cases so we can focus on criminals, recent border crossers, repeat violators, and this particular group has a strong equities for it. as we went to the case by case analysis of the existing backlog, it became clear to me that we needed to do something in addition to that, and that resulted in the conclusion to offer two-year deferred action subject to the world. >> what about the recent paris

and a case -- the recent arizona case that provided the court gave strong support for the exhibit a branch x occurred -- to exercise prosecutorial discretion? do you have any comments that you could share but us about that matter? >> the supreme court i think validated the fact that the federal government ultimately has the discretion and -- in enforcing and choosing how to enforce the nation's immigration laws. if you go back to president, you have reno -- precedent, you have cases, an article two, section 3

of the constitution reaffirming the executive has discretion in terms of who to prosecute and who to prioritize resources for. in this case, criminal hours, a recent border violators, and repeat violators. >> mm-hmm. our subcommittee on crime issued a subpoena for information related to individuals who were arrested, identified by ice for removal, but never taken into ice custody, and i have been told you produced nearly 250,000 individuals satisfying the subpoena, and you continue to provide additional information. how is that coming along? that was sort of a -- we did not normally have summit --

subcommittees' issuing subpoenas, but, oh, well, you know -- >> we intend and have been trying to comply with the subpoena and to provide documents. a lot of the requests are for documents in formats other than how we maintain the documents, which adds an additional level. i think we just received another request, i want to say, mid july. we intend to comply with that. >> i have other questions, but i will be submitting them to you and we will be putting them in the record. thank you, chairman smith. >> the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. >> thank you very much. first of all, let me compliment you for trying to soften me up by revealing you are a packers fan. i commend you for your very good judgment on that. now, one of the biggest problems

we have is visa overstays, i have seen estimates that up to 40% of illegal immigrants entered legally and did not leave before their visas expired. but figures do you have about these that overstays, and what plans do you have to track down those who have overstayed their visas as well as whether we should have some type of exit check when people leave the country? >> that we break that into two parts. on the visa overstays, based on numbers from u.s. visits, we could have had as many as 1.6 million. last year, i directed that we had to go back, we had to identify those bees out over stays, and evaluate their status and make -- we found in that evaluation that

half of those -- they have left the country and we just had not matched the records appropriately. a number of others actually were not over stays. they had changed their status. we have done background checks on them with the whole universe. we began with enhanced by the graphic, using data we previously did not happen in one place that you could easily search, but we have given that plan. we intend to move forward. one of our new projects is with canada. we will match with canada their entry data for land and trees.

if we do not have an ability to march our exit data, we will take their entry data and put it into our system. >> thank you. that gets me to the story that appeared yesterday in cns report that said that the tsa approved flight training for 25 illegal aliens at a boston area flights school that was on by another illegal alien. that was according to lay gao study. the attendees included eight who had entered the country illegally and 17 who had overstated their all-out period of -- allowed period of admission into the united states. there were over 25,000 foreign nationals in the faa registry that were not in the tsa

database. it had not been vetted. this sounds like a 911 days by flu. -- deja vu. what will the department of homeland security due to make sure that everyone who is in a flight school is probably vetted if they are a foreign national? >> that report referred to a several-year old matter. it is of concern. we took steps in 2010 to make sure that all foreign students who are in this country apply to flights go our vetted. that has been in place. we will confirm that. we have been doing so for two years. the gao says you do not have a written thing that we agree to do it. we need a written mao. we will put that together. >> how long will that take?

>> we will do it quickly. the flight schools -- we want to make sure we are tied their for obvious reasons. >> the story also said that the gao did not provide the full number of individuals who are not properly vetted. do you have numbers on how many were not properly vetted? >> all i can say is that foreign students are vetted. they have been for several years. if they applied for a license, there is a re-vetted that occurs. the faa database is matched against our databases. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. the gentleman from new york is recognized. >> 5 yes ago, congress passed a 911 commission implementation bill. and mandated that this month all maritime cargo containers must

be scanned before they are loaded into ship status into the united states. when we broke the law, 100% scanning would be difficult to achieve overnight. we gave ideas to comply and allow for extensions in certain cases. cnn will be phased in and the department would try to comply with the law. if granted itself a two-year extension for allport's citing apple's that the department never tried to overcome. it repeat a lot of the same objections we heard years ago. u prefer a layered approach. i do not think anyone would have a problem with that as long as the department's efforts to not stop with the high risk cargo. checking carter you think is high risk is only an advocate.

-- checking cargo that you only think is high-risk is an adequate. you must check 100% at airports. why shouldn't the same principle holds true for maritime containers? that is a lot. that is what you should be working to achieve. i am concern that they decided they did not agree with the law and has not made good faith efforts to resolve the potential challenges. it is justified in extending deadlines. there are security companies that want to work with the department on implementing the law. they tell us that the department will not talk to them. that a sense that the government would pay to operate the court meant. there is nothing in the law that says that should be burdened by taxpayers.

, which is about $66,000 worth of goods, has has -- this is a trivial cost. my questions are -- why do they continue to resist trying to comply with the lot? to achieve the scanning that the law requires? will you commit to work with us in good faith to make progress toward the mandate that congress passed into law five years ago for scanning 100% of cargo containers before putting them onto ships for the united states? >> we have made a good faith effort to comply with the law. we have conducted pilot projects abroad. we have commotion carriers. we have met with foreign carriers -- we have met with commercial carriers. we have met with foreign carriers. there has been excess of

research done on this. it was done by my predecessors and by us. we came to the same conclusion that the goal is the right goal. how we get there -- >> the goal of 100% scanning is the right call? >> the safe delivery of containers into u.s. ports. >> congress decided that a leered high-risk -- layered approach of inspecting only high-risk cargo -- and for that matter what it is here -- was not sufficient. it is not up to the department to change that. >> we have an extensive program, including not just faced in but the global supply chain initiative and of this. >> congress knew all about this, but they decided this was not efficient. the president signed into law that says you must implement 100% scanning with and five

years. the department has decided that is not practical, which is not your decision. that is congress' decision. you have made no real attempt to implement the law. >> we will have to disagree on that. we continue to improve efforts to inspect containers, had trusted shippers -- >> under 4% of containers are now expected -- inspected -- is it true that 2% or 4% of containers are inspected? >> it depends on the part of support. >> match for a nationally, it is under 4%. that leaves it 96% short. >> the gentle man's time has expired. thank you. the gentleman from california.

>> thank you very much. welcome. this is an important hearing. i have been involved with this issue for 25 years. it never seems to get any easier. i would like to make a unanimous consent request that because of the amount of time that we have this morning, we had the opportunity to submit questions. my unanimous consent would be -- the question that i submit to the secretary the responded to with in a period of 30 days. also the opportunity for the record to have a response to the questions that were asked -- that were responded back to us by the secretary. >> i reserve the right to object. the chairman from north

carolina. >> can the gentleman explain what he is requesting? >> i appreciate the opportunity to respond. i do not intend to ask any trick questions. i am not asking for questions. you will find that the questions will not be something that requires a great deal of research. it is more on policy and trying to understand the policy on some of these issues. i would like to -- sometimes we get responses that are not complete. i like to say, i accept, or i dishabille -- disagree on it, just for the record. >> i have some serious reservations about what he is proposing. i assume he is proposing a set of rules for himself that does not apply to other members. his intentions may be good, but i do not have the same level of confidence in all of the other

members having the same. it seems to me that each of us had the opportunity to have dialogue with the secretary and members of the administration by calling them, having dialogue with them on their own. it seems to me to set up this procedure, which is inconsistent with the committee rose, is something that is unnecessary. i am happy to listen to the gentleman, but i am trying to keep from objecting, -- >> i appreciate the gentleman's commons. i do not disagree with your statement about the committee and me individually. i cannot accept that. >> i appreciate the gentleman

acknowledging what i said. >> the issue here is that i do not intend this to be a precedent. this is not a special favor. that is why we have unanimous consent policy here on the floor, or wherever. i have never asked for this before. we have a limited amount of time. there is a tremendous amount on the agenda. i would like to ask some simple issues having to do with criminal immigrants, but not limited to, andy -- and respond to it. it would be called -- consistent with everything we are doing here, only giving the secretary opportunities to put these things together. that is the purpose of having this hearing. >> i have had a good discussion on this. thus the gentleman from north carolina subject -- does the

gentleman from north carolina object? >> let me be clear on why i intend to object. i think all of us are frustrated by the five minute rule. we are frustrated by the short time that the record is kept open for responses from the administration. a better route to cover that would be to extend the time for us to have this kind of back and forth from a shorter time that we have them having it to a longer time. people can go back and forth. i think also inclined to object.

>> may i respond? everyone on this committee, are typically those like my good friend bobby scott and others, over the 25 years that we have served on this committee for some of us, as it relates to the amount of time that members have taken respectively that the portion that i have taken in relation to my good friend is not even a tiny blip on the radar screen. >> for that reason, i am having trouble adjusting to the gentleman because i know his intentions are good. i think we would be setting a bad precedent if we did. for that reason, i must object. >> the gentleman from california is recognized for five minutes. >> while i understand, i am disappointed, but life will go on. my questions will be more

complex after the hearing. i will submit some. does the dhs plan on giving people -- how many will receive work permits? >> clarification -- there is no executive order per cent. this is a memo from myself as the secretary. two of the component heads are setting out the deferred action program. the answer is yes, they will be able to apply for work authorization. >> we keep saying we do not want to talk about amnesty. on a temporary basis, this is

the fact of amnesty -- de facto. if you are allowed to stay when you are here illegally, you did to stay. how many illegals would be given work permits? >> they can apply for work authorization. they will have to meet the standards for being eligible for authorization. the linkage between deferred to action and the work authorization application goes back to the 1980's. >> whatever the requirements are. there will be two or 300,000 people -- we have three or 400,000 people out of work. >> yes, and there are -- if i may back up because this was an issue that i thought about the plea before i wrote my memo. jobs for americans are very important. my conclusion was that there are lots of different ways to

stimulate job creation. some of them are before the congress. we should not balance the american economy on the backs of children who were brought here -- >> with all due respect, because of the time, i would like to have a system -- a succinct answer. how many people as a result of this that are illegal in this country will be able to work in this country while we have 14 million american citizens that are without work? do you have an approximate number? >> i tried to keep my answers assistant. there is no real testament. >> it could be a million. >> we do not know them and you have answered my question. will work site enforcement -- we talked about the border. we do not talk about the 22 million people that are here

illegally in the country. is it true that worksite enforcement is down 70% over the past three years? >> that answer is partially true. it is down from 5000 to 1500. we have been able to remove 100,000 more felons from the country and the number of i9 audits, several sanctions. >> if you had increased the number of worksite would assumes, i that that would be a better situation. >> even if we had not made any adjustments for our priorities for criminals, you are still talking about a maximum of 5000 cases in the past. fell after the employees

themselves. -- go after the employees themselves. >> i could not agree with you more. this is a yes or no. is it true that ice agents are instructed not to contain illegals during a work site enforcement action? >> it does not permit -- it depends. >> you have answered my question. getting back to the questions having to do with a visa and visa overstays. we accept the fact that a large percentage of people that a legally come to this country never cross the southern border. the people that were the perpetrators of 911 were beazer overstays. dhs has established the security units with a presence in only 15 countries. is has identified 50 high risk

post. -- ice has identified 50 high risk posts. >> difficult choices had to beamy given the constraints of the budget control act. -- difficult choices had to be made given the constraints of the budget control act. it is not something that is essential to the national security. >> thank you very much. my time has expired. >> thank you very much. the gentleman from virginia is recognized delon. >> if the gentleman has follow- up questions, he may anticipate

any difficulties. >> we endeavor to do our best in a timely manner. >> thank you. you have talked about the steve visas -- student visas. the deferred action. august 15 you indicated would be the application date. one with the -- they expect to get some documentation? well with that allow them to do? >> we will have guidance by august 1. what we anticipate is in a short time after they send in their applications, they will receive an acknowledgement that their application is complete and ready to be processed. they will get a number. that will in april them to track their matter as a goal -- goes through the process. >> will they be able to board an airplane? >> yes.

>> with that or with the subsequent documentation? >> there will be employed -- input into the system. the idea is that deportation would be stayed until we complete the process. >> thank you. can you give us the status of the department implementation and whether or not you're regulations would be the same as those in the department of justice? >> they will meet the standards. there cannot be identical because our facilities are different. we have issued new standards for present -- prison rape elimination. we are following up on allegations that are made. we will issue guidelines or

standards that meet its. they will be different from doj because our facilities are different. >> there is technology with the container trucks can drive through a scanner and scanned one get of the truck is going 15 or more miles from our. -- per hour. >> the current truck scanners at the border where we have thousands of trucks crossed a bridge across every day -- the trust -- trucks that go through every day is at 3 miles per hour. >> is there any reason why that cannot be universal and why you cannot do 100%? >> 100% of rock project of what? >> container trucks leaving the port? >> that requires a longer and

sudden time permits. we will give you some material on that. seaborne containers go through a different leered process of security that is different than plan born trucks. -- landborne trucks. >> what portions of containers are scant in foreign ports before they come to america? >> it depends on the court. we use a risc targeting system to identify high-risk -- risk system to identify high risk ports. we have a process for search of fine trusted officials that are moving containers to the united states. lead to some random checking. when we have containers that do not meet those standards, what we do to make sure that those

containers are safe before they enter a u.s. port. >> can you talk about the the federal use of industry program? >> we use fpi under contract. we use them in d.c. >> what do you mean by use? >> we have a contract with them. is there a political issue i can help you with? >> the federal prison industry is a program that we want to maximize the use of because you have prisoners that are getting job training, using the present -- prison program for management programs, encouraging them to more likely get a job when they leave. a lot of agencies are not fully

utilizing it. we wanted to make sure that the department of homeland security was fully using the program so that we get the best benefits. the number of people in prison under the program has been declining of the past few years. >> my understanding is that we are, but i would be happy to verify via the to verify that for you. >> thank you. >> thank you. you have made several references to responding to requests from this committee in a timely fashion. he last appeared for this -- last appeared in october of last year. it a number of questions were submitted to the committee and transmitted to you in a timely fashion. the answer is to those questions rolled in at 11:26 p.m. last

night. do you regard that nine-month time to answer questions as thing tightly -- timely? >> obviously not. it is before this hearing. >> 11:26 p.m. last night? that is supposed to help the members of the committee prepared? >> i will need to go back. sometimes we have responded and committee members to not get the response. as they prepare for herrings, their staff pass as for new copies. i would need to look into that. i'd like to remind the committee that we try to be timely. we have well over 100 committees and subcommittees submitting questions to was. >> your statement today that you answer these in a timely fashion is not rebutted by your failure to answer the questions until nine months after the last hearing? >> again, --

>> let me go on to question -- we have answered that -- that question. you have already answered it once. >> can we have a regular order? >> i would definitely like regular order. >> i just wanted to clear up what i said. we often have a situation where we are rescinding answer is to questions that were sent before -- rescinding answers to questions that were sent before. >> that is not the case here. i would be happily -- happy to look into what. >> we want you to answer the questions in a timely manner. >> there enough. >> you state that homeland security begins with hometown security. you have for to get information and resources into the hands of local officials. how does cancelling your 287g

agreement in arizona and refusing to enter into them in virginia a hometown security? when you take that away from local law enforcement, can you claim you are working to help hometown security? >> absolutely. 287g are very productive. the task force's you refer to are unfair for -- and productive and very expensive. of the six or seven errors on agreements we have on the task forces, they have produced some removals in two years. the only one that was doing in thing was the department of public safety. they were fine with our cancellation. almost 10 times as much to secure submit -- communities. we are moving to the more efficient model. >> why were you not use local

law enforcement to apprehend individuals that are illegally in the united states and promptly remove them from this country? that is not what is happening in virginia. >> one of the things we have done to replace those task forces is the great expansion of secure communities in the jails themselves, the programs where we refer fingerprints to the immigration database. you will see that our ability to apprehend and remove criminals from the country has gone up dramatically because of that. >> does this mean rejigger criticism -- does this mean he will remove from the website the section that refers to 287 g success stories? " there may be some success

stories. >> why are you counting them if there are success stories that you think is a program that is flawed. >> i will tell the people to take them down. the program is expensive and does not work the way congress intended. >> overtime surveys have found the department of common security employees are less satisfied with their jobs that the government average. ice rink 222, fema 231, tsa 232, all other components rent 224. you have a morale problem that has only gotten worse since you have taken over. i think you will agree low morale has the ability to impact how effectively public servants to their jobs. what is the cause of the morrell -- morale?

what are you doing to address the serious morale problems? >> the morale issue is one i am concerned about. we want our employees -- good morale, well trained. we have looked into the numbers. one of the real sources was that our first line or mid-level supervisors were promoted without training on how to actually be a supervisor. that caused a lot of discontent. there are other reasons as well. i meet regularly now with our component heads and have directed them in turn to take all action necessary to do what we must to bring the more up. we also brought an experts from opm and other places and have looked at other departments that were able to go from low to high. techniques for things they did from the management standpoint when we had -- and attended to

employ them as well. >> my time has expired. i do have additional questions i will submit to the chairman and right thing and i hope he will answer them in a real timely fashion, not nine months after we submitted them like last time. >> i understand your point. >> what do you consider to be timely? >> it depends on the questions. some require multiple departments. >> 60 at the outset of multiple departments are involved. >> i will commit that we will aim for 60, yes. if we have to have more we will tell you why. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think the last exchange may illustrate the concern that i was expressing about the

gentleman from california's unanimous consent request. i was feeling really bad about it. the responses of the secretary make it clear that putting the administration or any of these departments in a 30 day straight jacket is just not viable. although i fully support the administration responding to our oversight and responding to legitimate questions that are raised. i want to express my gratitude for your cutting back on the 287 g program. i think it was the least successful biggest abomination of any program i have observed

in our local communities. to turn local law enforcement away from their primary responsibilities and in many cases just absolute which hunts and doing something that is the primary responsibility of the federal government. in fact, it's so biased me against ice it is hard for me to say something nice about them. now i have to say something nice about them. >> can i write it down? >> actually, i think the efforts you have made and the intellectual property area dealing with counterfeit goods and things online, i think while there have been some problems

obviously, i think i saw has done a commendable job. -- ice has done a commendable job. to acknowledge there can be successes and failures at the same time, i have already acknowledged some of the failures. i would point out the success in north carolina that led to arrest in charges of trafficking in counterfeit drugs, pills that were circulating that were counterfeit in north carolina. ice did a good job. without even asking a question, let me say that i also applaud the administration's decision regarding the young the people who are here under the dream act

category so to speak. if anybody, regardless of what your position is on immigration -- if anybody deserves to be treated as if they were -- one month, two years have no connection to the country and which they were born, had no responsibility for bringing themselves into this country. if you consider their parents irresponsible or renegades, we should not pass that along to their children. the only place that they know as home has been the united states of america. if anybody deserves the benefit of this policy, it is these young people. i do not know how anybody can argue with that.

i hope you get this program implemented and all of the rules in place quickly so these kids can get into a normal pattern. they have been educated here. the notion that we would invest all of this money and sent -- to send them back to a country they have no connection to just seems to me to be absolute folly. i want to publicly applaud the administration and you, madam secretary for this change in policy. i hope as some point we will get around to setting up some additional rational immigration policies to set up a comprehensive immigration policy in our country. to get them out of this temporary status that you have

been able to justify for them. with that, maybe i will submit some questions and give them 30- 60-90 days to respond also. i do want to encourage you to respond to my friend from california there. their questions as timely as you can. i yield back. >> the gentleman from ohio is recognized for his questions. >> i just have a few questions. i am trying to fit their around his head here. all right. i would like to ask about how our customs and border patrol is handling counterfeit products coming into our country? intellectual property in the united states is responsible for spurring the industry and developing new technology and creating jobs. i know we are focused on how we can get new jobs into the

country. however many bad actors are replicating trademarked american goods and shipping them back into the united states for sale here -- these fake products have a negative impact on the economy. the dangerous oftentimes for the health and safety of the american people. the customs and border patrol agents, they generally make the first contact with the shipments are coming into the country. it is critical that your officers are able to communicate valuable information with the rights holders, the actual company here that would be producing legitimate products, not the fake products that are coming in. those of the best individuals who are suited to authenticate the products and make sure they're actually real or that they are fake. that is why congressman po from taxes and i have introduced the four and toughen protection act.

-- foreign counterfeit protection act. perhaps your staff brought that to your attention or maybe you are familiar with the legislation, can we count on your support for it? >> i am not directly aware of the bill but i am aware of the issue. when we buy counterfeit products, there has been a pre- existing legal opinion that we were barred from telling the actual holder of the trademark about the infringing product. my understanding is also that that has been revised to unchanged so that barrier along exists. >> that is the very issue. it has been improved somewhat. there are still some problems with it that we like to work with you on that. it is critical to creating jobs and protecting the rights of the people here who are producing the legitimate products. i was encouraged -- i was

encouraged to see that you allow your officers to share information about suspected counterfeit to the trademark owner, to help them determine if the product is counterfeit or not. for them to see if it bears a counterfeit mark. there could be no meaningful disclosure to trademark owner and the product will not be denied entry. while i understand your agency came up with this procedure as a way to protect the interests of the grey market importers, i am concerned that this far your agency has been -- and willingly created a giant loophole for the most unscrupulous of

counterfeiters. what makes you think that a person willing and able to create a fake product that looks real will not use the seven-day. to produce phony documents, fake certificates in an attempt to show the counterfeits are genuine? they might not be able to seek help from one source to make sure the product or documents are real. the owner of the trademark, this new procedure whereby the differences to the importer and not the trademark holder, potentially that kind of deception creating a loophole as i indicated to actually usher counterfeits into the country. we certainly appreciate your looking into that. but the thing that is a very fair. and i would be happy to not only look at about work with you on this problem.

>> finally i would like to turn now to another recent issue with counterfeits coming across the border. in the latest attempt to rip-off u.s. trademarks, it appears certain criminals have found a new approach, that of counterfeit coupons. last week there was a police raid adapter arizona where police confiscated $2 million worth of assets in a home-based business that was responsible for producing and distributing a counterfeit coupons on websites affecting more than 40 u.s. consumer-products manufacturers including a company based in my district that is proctor and gamble. the alleged leader of the operation robyn ramirez is accused of bringing them from overseas in large quantities and selling them on her website for 50% of the face value. the scope of the investigation has an economic impact on the hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. i would ask you to look into the

matter and make sure you are doing everything possible to protect businesses here so that we can create jobs. >> thank you. does the gentleman from virginia have unanimous consent request? >> yes, i would ask that the printout we have of the department's website under the icy e section entitled success stories with small print scores of success stories with regard to the 2870 program. >> without objection. >> before asking any questions, i would like to ask unanimous consent to put some material into the record. some have questioned the

secretary's legal authority to set immigration enforcement priorities and exercise prosecutorial indiscretions on a case by case basis. i would like to enter into the record a decision that explains immigration officials have broad discretion, a memorandum by the research service analyzing the mayetary's memorandum on 28, 2012 letter from 100 law professors to our president addressing the executive's authority to grant administrative release. a bipartisan letter establishing prosecutorial discretion as well established and was granted in case law and they november 17, 2000 memorandum laying out the

authority for exercising prosecutorial discretion. >> without objection. >> i would also like to ask unanimous consent to put in to record statements from the community including evangelical immigration table, the traffic conference bishop, the evangelical lutheran church in america and the support of the dream act announcement. >> without objection. >> i am mindful that we are joined today in this hearing by elia acosta brought to the united states,karen who was 5

years old, these are wonderful young people who have achieved great things in their education. every time i go to speak to a school whether it is people getting their ph.d. in physics or whether it is a law school or high school, some young person will come up and say i am a dream act kid. of all of the people who deserve our consideration. if you could see these young people. i would like to thank you for the actions you have taken to allow these young people -- the facto americans. this is their country but the papers are not in order. for taking the steps you did

that allow them to live normal lives until we get our act together here in the congress. i would like to note that in the process of getting our act together the house did in fact pass the dream act in december of 2010. it got 55 yes votes in the senate. because of their crazy rules we could not get 60 rules to pass. -- 60 votes to pass. hopefully we will have the opportunity to pass that and reform the law top to bottom. i have a concern i would like to raise about the implementation of the applications. is not about your department. it is about people who would prey on young people. every time there is an announcement, there are unscrupulous people who will try to charge people, notary publics

to say you need to pay as this or that. i am hopeful that the department will take some steps. there is no reason why a defect 0 american who is an 18-year-old kid on the honor roll need to pay some key to a lawyer or anyone else to get this application under way. have you thought about efforts we might make to make sure unscrupulous people do not take advantage in this situation? >> yes. the whole issue of fraud that has been a problem and immigration, we're trying to address it in a couple of ways. out reach, working with a different faith based and advocacy groups and with the steering groups and others. the application itself is available on-line. it will be based on existing

application forms. there will be a fee associated with the application as i think all of us understand. we are going to do that. i will reach out to the justice department themselves to see if they can help us in this regard. >> i am glad to hear that. i think it is something in our own communities. i want to talk a little bit about the history of the dream act. for many years we worked together on this. i will never forget the late paul deal more who was a very conservative man. there were many things we did not agree on. he called me and described a young man in his little town in ohio who was the valedictorian of the high school. he was the quarterback on the football team. he went to go get a document and

it was only then he was told he was not born a in the united states. he said, i will straighten this out. i will go down to the federal government and straighten this out. he went on the day before christmas and it put him in handcuffs. the little town was outraged. gilmore understood this issue in a way that was a visceral. that conservative republican put his name on the dream act as a co-sponsor. i am hopeful as we move forward we can get the kind of consensus that we want on this issue and we are able to do the right thing not only for these young people but for our country. they are a part of a rich future for our country. >> thank you. >> thank you for being here. i think we all know there is two issues here. one is whether the substance of

what is being done is appropriate. the second is at least up to a short period of time ago many of us thought we were still a nation of laws. we want to make sure we do what we do in a legal matter. i know it is always dangerous to put too much work -- credence into the work our elected officials do. i want to go back to something that the chairman said earlier. he said there are enough flaws in the book by congress that are clear in terms of how we can enforce our immigration system that for me issuing an executive order to ignore the mandates would not conform with my role as president. he said that on march 28, 2011. my first question for you so we can understand, to your knowledge were there any laws that changed between march 28,

2011 and today that would change with the president said? >> no. >> do you feel that the president was inaccurate and what he stated on march 28, 2011? >> i think it is important to understand what actually occurred here. >> i am just asking if what the president stated on march 28, 2011, was he correct in that statement? >> as a general that time. i noticed that you said the memorandum that you issued was not an executive order per se. i do not know. i am just harping back to my old law school days and the bible we had was the law dictionary. i look at the executive order and says an order issued on behalf of the president

regarding a constitutional provision law or treaty. was this memorandum that you issued issued on behalf of the president? >> it was under my authority as the secretary setting the priorities for the enforcement of the nation's immigration laws in an effort to deal not only with these compelling cases but the continued effort to clear the backlog to deal with the more -- >> is it your opinion that the authority that you issue this under as your authority has greater authority than the president of the united states? >> a lot of authority going far back about the ability to prosecute or set priorities. >> that is not all my question with all due respect. my question is a very simple one. do you feel you have greater authority than the president of

the united states on this matter? >> this is a case but his determination. this is a case by case determination design very carefully to be stated clearly within prosecutorial discretion presidents. >> to the president announced a this policy from the rose garden. i know that you are saying this was issued by you. it was the president and announced the policy as president of the united states. the law dictionary says carefully an order issued by on behalf the president regarding a law or treaty. are you saying this was issued without -- not in conjunction with the president of the united states? >> this decision came from the department of romance security. the president approved of the decision which is what he denounced at the rose garden. it had already been announced

the morning by myself. >> the president announced the policy. he is the one appointed you, is that not correct? what's that is true. >> you take your authority from the president. >> and the constitutional laws of the united states. >> and you hold a constitutionally directed office. can you tell me what part of article 2 is your authority? >> i would go to section 3, the obligation to carry out the loss faithfully. to execute the laws. >> as i understand it, the president of the united states, you do not dispute the fact when he said he did not have authority to issue an order to do what you have now issued as secretary of common security. what you feel you have that authority and a capability to do? >> we are well seated in the law, that is correct. >> and again, you can see that

the president did not have the authority to issue the order you wish? >> that is not what i said. i said in the executive order was not involved. >> but he did -- he could not have issued an executive order based on what he said. >> could he have waived a magic wand and say everybody is home free? know. can a prosecutor's office a on a case by case basis we will defer -- >> could he issue an executive order to save -- to do what you did? >> yes. >> thank you. >> the president's statement is being quoted but only partially because the rest of the statement is "now what we can do is prioritize enforcement since there are limited resources and say, we will not go chasing after this young man or anybody else who has been acting

responsibly and would otherwise qualify for legal status if the dream act passed." the rest of the statement is important. >> thank you. reclining my time. i am pleased to have you here. i want to congratulate you. i do not care who did the action, whether you or the president, i am please the was done. it was the right thing to do. it was the fair thing to do. i happily got on the telephone and called as many of my friends to tell them who were feeling so at risk having been brought to this country at an early age and found a could not participate. thank you. thank you. having said that, i want to ask you about the visa program. we have reforms needed to

minimize the risk. you know, there is conflict and opinions even in the president's job panel's a bout this program. i am concerned about what is said in this report. for example -- i will read directly from this. restricted agency's oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for u.s. workers. elements of the program that could serve as worker protections such as requirements to take wages, of the says, temporary status, -- visas, -- it goes on to talk secondly about the program that lacks provisions for holding employees accountable to program requirements when they obtain h 1b workers when it discusses the

staffing companies. changes have in combination increased the pull of h1b workers at lower the cap for eligibility. you know, i know we try sometimes to have all things always in this country when we are trying to help people and companies etc. we have an employment problem in america. we have serious education problems. we are told by those who try to protect the program and expand the program that we have occupations that are desperately needed to do some of the jobs that are needed. perhaps in silicon valley and other places. they have to look for importation of workers to do that. some of us maintain that many of these companies have the kind of campuses that should include more training, more development.

we want our education system to put more people into the pipeline. with these kinds of concerns, what can you do to ensure that these kinds -- that the oversight that is needed is done? those of us here at this level of government making public policy, we have to weigh in on whether or not we want to continue to support, expand, or what have you. what roles will you play? >> i am not personally familiar with that report. i will follow up. we will follow up with the of what we have done in response and pursuant to the rip -- recommendations to it. >> thank you. i look forward to it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you madam secretary for your testimony today.

a number of curiosities have arisen listening to you. did you have discussions with president obama with regard to the policy within the june 15 memorandum prior to issuing the decision? >> i did not. >> would members of the white house a direct tax -- access to the president? once i informed the white house prior to the release of the memorandum that was my intent to do so. the internal meetings that we worked on and how we developed the program started in early may. >> does that mean your staff had communications with white house staff in regard to this? >> yes, they raised no objection to my intent to prioritize cases in the fashion that we have. >> were you surprised a new issue the memorandum that the president had a press conference scheduled within hours? >> no. >> that was coordinated with the

white house? >> it is a major announcement to how we are prioritizing education enforcement and is appropriate for the president to speak to it. >> he pointed out article to section 3 in the constitution. i thought i had memorized. i looked it up. you assert your responsibility under the constitution. >> one of them, yes. >> of congress is going to direct -- congress writes the laws. the president has been clear on that. i think you will agree with the statement the president said. if congress is to read a lot that directs an executive branch to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, how would we read that bill if we wanted the laws enforced that you have decided will not be? >> i cannot speculate as to how you would read that but i would simply say based on my history

as a prosecutor there are lots of laws on the books within the framework of which prosecutors make -- >> we understand prosecutorial discretion. when i looked through the reference to prosecutorial -- prosecutorial discretion. i see it mentioned four times in here. it looks almost as if this is written anticipating the constitutional objection that i assure you i will print -- there is a separation of powers. the executive branch cannot legislate by executive order or memorandum. we cannot allow the article ii legislative branch. only the congress acting to its authority can confer these

rights. you have directed the director to issue a work permit for people who fit within four classes. this is not an individual directive. establishes for classes with and it to issue a work permit that does not exist. our vises and work permits are creations of congress, the executive branch. will you send this before we have to take it to court? >> i will not resend it. is right under law. it fits within our priorities. although it came out of the department of common security, the president is four square behind and embraces the policy as the right thing to do. >> the president challenged it. we have to assert to this authority. the founding fathers envisioned each branch would carefully protect the authority invested

within the constitution. when you cross those lines and there are a list of things that have been done by this president, this one is the most clear. i accepted the prosecutorial discretion when it dealt with individuals. i do now when it deals with groups of people created by a memorandum. i do not when it deals with a work permit order to be issued the does not exist in the united states code. that is a province of congress. we will see each other down the line in litigation. >> thank you, mr. king. >> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome, madam secretary. i would like to address the topics. i want to welcome the young hispanics who are here with us this morning. let me tell you. when you have seen sacrament -- celebratory napolitano handing the policy that the federal government is about to

implement, that means your dreams are very much alive. now, secretary, as you probably expected, i want to raise the same issue with you this morning because the last time you appeared before the committee, mainly for the crisis in puerto rico. i want to express my gratitude to you and your team for traveling to puerto rico last week in order to investigate the situation firsthand and to meet with the governor and myself. i think our meetings were positive and productive. i hope you will agree. on tuesday i wrote you a letter. in addition to think he -- thanking you for your business, i noticed your presence underscored the federal government's commitment to working with local law enforcement to expand our efforts to combat drug trafficking and related violence on the island.

i said i was heartened to hear you be clear that public -- puerto rico's crisis has your full attention and our model moving forward. i also expressed agreement with your statement that the definition of success should be significant as sustained reduction in the number of homicides on the island. i think we all recognize the urgency and light of the severity of the situation. in my letter i strongly endorsed your plan to develop a law enforcement strategy specifically tailored for porter rico and the neighboring islands. i believe the strategy will ensure our efforts are coordinated and will help to identify gaps in the current approach that can be filled. i respectfully ask this be coordinated with the department of justice. personnel are working side by side with your men and women on

the frontlines of this fight. finally, i know that any meaningful struggle you will require reasonable allocation of personnel and resources whether temporary or enduring basis. in the five-year period between 2007 and 2011 the number of homicides nationwide fell 20%. in the same. the numbers of murders rose by over 55% in puerto rico. the law enforcement footprint on the island has not evolved in the face of the profoundly changed circumstances. it is my fervent hope that the forthcoming law enforcement strategy will be action oriented and more recognize an enhanced response is required if we are to be successful in the shared endeavor. madam secretary, i just want to give you the opportunity to tell me and my fellow members of this committee in broad terms, how do you envision going forward on

this issue? i thank you. >> thank you. yes, i went to puerto rico because i am troubled by a number of things in terms of the crime situation there. the homicide rate being twice that of mexico is a real eye opener. on my return, i have already met internally with my staff and we have appointed an internal person to help coordinate. we will reach out to doj and a particular to the u.s. attorney in puerto rico. i think it will take all of us working together to get a handle on this and get that crime rate down. that is what our intent is. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman and madam secretary for being here. when you were here back in october we discussed the week

before he had been online using the security clearance you have given him when you placed him on the advisory -- the homeland's security advisory council. he used that to access the state and local intelligent data base and download the material. we have information that he shot at trying to claim texas was islamophobes. since that time, you told me personally at that time that you were going to look into it. you were not going to appoint somebody. you yourself would look into it. what did you find out? >> i found out the statements that have been made in that regard are false, misleading and objectionable. >> you need to know that you

have people who are applying in your department. the texas department of public safety has been told the investigation was done. he did access the classified information with his own private computer. he did download the documents that we knew he did. the one thing they could not confirm because they did not talk to a reporter or the people that he shopped the story to, they could not confirm that he shopped the story. are you saying right here before this congress that as secretary of homeland security it is a lie that he down loaded material from a classified website using the secret security clearance to give me? are you saying that is a lie? >> i in saying that is inaccurate. that is correct. >> what is inaccurate about

that? >> a number of things. we have several people on the home and security advisory committee who are muslim. they have been helping law enforcement for a long time. he was recognized by the fbi -- >> i did not say anything about that. confine your effort as to what i said and what you find misleading in it. >> one of the things i find misleading is that he's -- he somehow downloaded classified documents. >> you are saying the state and local intelligence and data base is not classified? >> i am saying as part of my note he did not out of classified documents. >> one of the gains that it played about people who come up here and testify as they have somebody not provide them adequate information so that they can come in here and say "so far as i know, not to my knowledge." the obscure the truth.

it did not bother you that he access to information? >> he accessed some information. what bothers me is the allegation made against anybody that happens to be muslim. >> the allegations are not because he is muslim. you follow me around the world. you see me hugging muslims a round the world. the ones that i hug are our friends. this administration has a hard time recognizing members of terrorist groups that are allowed into the white house. you are aware of that happening, are you not? >> absolutely not. >> the evidence speaks for itself. obviously you are kept in the dark about a lot of these things. are you aware of what the freedom and justice party is in egypt? >> representative of -- >> are you aware of what the

freedom and justice party is in egypt? it is a simple question. it does not afford an interruption. is she aware of what the freedom and justice party is in egypt? >> with the secretary respond to the question. >> yes. >> are you aware that his foundation that is now had their charter pulled because they failed to provide the information that the government requires to keep their status? are you aware that was before the status was pulled called the freedom and justice foundation? >> i will not get into a debate did not some of this -- >> i am asking you if you know simple facts. >> i would like -- >> use a you will not get into a debate. i do not want a debate. this is a question and answer. are you aware of that being the

name of his foundation that now has the 501c3 status pulled. >> the insinuation -- >> will you answer the question -- >> can we have regular order? >> please answer just the question. >> with all respect, i believe you are insinuating that i and members of my staff -- >> i am not insinuating anything. i am asking a direct question. >> let me say -- >> were you aware of the freedom and justice foundation -- >> let me say to the gentleman from texas, i do not think you're going to get a different answer. >> i would ask the assistance of the chairman to direct the witness to answer the question as asked. it is very simple, yes or no. >> you are free to give a final

answer. >> i would like to say to this committee -- >> that does not sound like a yes or no. >> mr. chairman, regular order. >> the answer is not responsive. >> madam secretary, do you have anything to add? >> i did not know this was a court with rules of evidence. i was hoping i could explain my answer. >> do you want to proceed to do just that? >> my question was a yes or no answer. >> regular order. >> the reasons there are rules of evidence are so witnesses do not go off on a -- >> mr. chairman, can we have regular order. >> the gentleman's time has expired. as the witness said anything to add? >> yes. this committee has a long and proud tradition. these kind of accusations demesne the committee.

the fact that we would -- >> i have not insinuated -- >> mr. chair, regular order. >> and me say to the gentleman -- >> there is no insinuation. -- >> regular order. >> to come in here with an allegation. but said the committee will be in order. i understand the frustrations of the gentleman from texas but i do not believe he will get a different answer. his time has expired. the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> thank you. are you familiar with these cases, the lowest deck case in new york, the case in california. you familiar with those names? >> i may know them by different descriptors.

>> let me briefly go through these and i will talk about specifically criminals. as a former judge and prosecutor as you work, crime is something that none of us like. there are some criminals that are still halt -- they are still here and do not go home when they are supposed to. louis decker was a grandmother in new york when she was ordered a murder by bangladesh. he was illegally here in the united states. the system worked while in prison he was ordered back to bangladesh. he never went back to bangladesh. it would not take and here he gets out of prison and he murders louis decker. steals her car and some other things. ashton klein mcmurray, a 16-

year-old child coming come from a football game was murdered and beaten by an individual from cambodia. the same situation. he never went back when he was supposed to. ben luck was sent to prison for armed robbery. it's out of prison and was ordered to go back to vietnam but they never took him back. he gets out and murdered five people in san francisco. we have this recurring issue of criminals committing crimes from foreign countries. the law requires the go back home. they do not take them back. we actually have a lot and says they are supposed to be some diplomatic and the says that are supposed to be rejected for people who do not go back. my investigation of the law, i can only find one time since the law was written that one country was sanctioned for failure to

take back lawfully convicted criminals from their country by the isle of be says and that was gone up. it took back 112 after recension them. the way i understand, your department is to let the state department know these countries are stonewalling the system -- i think gaming the system. they just want to leave them here and make them our problem. i only see one case and that was several years ago. the concern i have is, why is that not happening more often that the country is sanctioned by diplomatic vises for failure to take back lawfully convicted felons. when i read the law it is a requirement that they shall take back -- the the says will be denied to these countries,

diplomatic visas or other vises. i do not see that happening even though the loss as a shock. the state department is supposed to reject the visas. can you help us out with that? >> he really identify two problems. there is a supreme court precedent that says we cannot hold people indefinitely. there is a time limit on that. the other is the practical problem that there are a few countries in the world who refuse to accept them. the state department is well aware of this. i think the moves they are making is something you should address to them. there are well aware of the problem. >> what i hear from the state department is, they are passing the buck. they did not get the information from you from the countries that are not compliant. that is the answer i get from them. that is what i am asking you the question. are you furnishing them the

state department, the affirmation of these countries that refuse to take their citizens back? the issue is not what i am concerned about. that is the law and i understand that. it cannot keep them in jail. that is not the issue. the issue is that they get out. and there are problems. the state department is media for mission and they do not get it from you. are you getting that information to state about noncompliance? >> there must be because they are taking action and issuing these countries the diplomatic tools they are using a something--- is something you should address to them. >> do you know of any other country that has been sanctioned and we refuse to give them the says about the noncompliance? >> i do not know of any. >> i have more questions but i will submit them to the record because i know you will not let me keep talking. >> the gentleman from utah is

recognized. >> thank you, madam secretary. i appreciate you being here. 40 appearances is an impressive number. i want to talk very quickly. i sponsored a bill, hr3012. fairness for high skilled immigrants at the got rid of the cap limitations. we passed it out of this committee and is in the house. -- it is in the senate. is it something the administration would be ok with? but some would have to look into that. that sounds right. let me verify that. >> i want to give to the southwest border. i am concerned, the president, yourself, the attorney general

have all said the selfless border is more secure than it has ever been before. an operation fast and furious, the government purposely allow 2000 weapons to get into the hands of the drug cartels. how many of those weapons were detained at the border? >> i cannot answer that. >> my understanding is there has not been one single gun from operation fast and furious apprehended by, and security or any other law enforcement other than the two weapons that were found at the scene at the death of brian carry. is there any -- am i wrong in that? what can i answer that. i do not know. >> let me ask you this. one of the things that has been touted is when you look at the different sectors a run the country and the protection we are trying to provide this

country, the tucson sector is by far the most problematic. my question for you is, if the number of detentions is going up, does that mean that the border is more secure? if the numbers -- if the number of detentions is going down, does that mean the border is more secure? which one is it? >> it is down. >> does that mean it is more secure? what more apprehensive counterplots show it is more secure. >> the way it works is that -- this is something difficult to measure. the apprehension numbers are used as a proxy for how many are attending. we actually think we are now picking up almost everybody trying to cross the border illegally. we can look at that because we are looking at crime members in oenix, stash house in phoenix.

other conditions for their turn to get into the country. >> in phoenix the crime rate between 2008 and two dozen that was 6%. to claim it is more secure, i look at nogalis. that is the biggest city on the border in the most problematic sector. if you look at it as a nine in 2010, the total number of offenses recorded is up 92%. >> if i might, i know the arizona situation very well and pay a lot of attention to it. the phoenix violent crime rate, kidnapping, stash houses, and other things associated with the illegal immigration, way down. it does not correspond to any other number i have seen or what the sheriff tells us. >> this is from the department the police.

let me read some members. 2009 to 2010, burglaries' up hundred 13%, and grand theft auto up 70%, assault up 81%, damage to property up 81%. it does not sound like this is the most secure border we have ever had. >> i will tell you this. there are probably a number of reasons for that. i would challenge the accuracy of those numbers for a number of reasons. said me a question and i will be happy to answer it for you. >> that would be great. we have operational control of the border yet? >> i think the southwest border is as secure as it has been in decades. >> what percentage of the border is secure? >> i would say that we have the ability to move men, air cover to the entire southwest border.

>> but we have not recovered a single gun from fast and furious even though we purposely give the drug cartel 2000 weapons? this is the concern. i would disagree >> with the chairman healed? >> yes. >> i want to touch on a couple of things. the county office last year said that only 40% of the border is under control. do you disagree with that? >> yes. it gets into governmentese and different -- >> their objective is not under the thumb of the administration. the other thing i want to make sure i heard correctly is that you thought everyone crossing the border illegally was being picked up? >> in some areas, yes. >> i do not think you made that

clear. the border agents i talk to in texas told me that several individuals would cross across the border for every person apprehended. crux of the border patrol would be happy to provide you with a briefing -- >> the border patrol would be happy to provide you with a briefing. we are surging in -- >> in what area do you think you are picking up immigrants trying to cross illegally? >> i did have to give you a list. at least one of the arizona sectors we are getting virtually everyone. it is certainly one in three. that is the typical the autistic. >> for you to say -- statistics. >> the decision that, i doubt that is true. >> we are picking up a lot of people, mr. chairman.

>> to suggest that there is no illegal immigration going on in arizona is a joke. >> that is not accurate of what i said. i said i think in one of the sectors i think we are getting virtually all. i think the tucson sector is a very active sector. when i compare the numbers in the tucson sector to what they were a few years ago, there is almost no comparison. it is night and day. >> i wish i had more time. the chairman from south carolina. >> you mentioned a term eight times in this memo. i want to ask you about this phrase. it was important enough to use multiple times. prosecutors to have a lot of discretion.

we have the discretion whether to indict in some states and when to call a case to trial or to send us a bargain, but i am interested in which there are any limits to discretion. i can tell you, madame secretary, i had to prosecute a lot of cases where i disagree with the underlying law. i never understood or agreed with the disparity in the cocaine power. i never agreed with the disparity. it never entered my mind to subordinate the legislative intent with my own. i say to people who think that they benefit from these episodic exceptions to the administration of law equally to be careful. today it may benefit you. tomorrow it may not. with respect, their defense is not this administration or the

department. their defense is that we are a nation of laws and not a nation of men or women. let me ask you this. if they decided that he thought marijuana should not decriminalized, does he have the ability, the power, the 42 no longer prosecute marijuana cases? -- does he no longer have to prosecute marijuana cases? perhaps the law is still in the books. >> i asked if the administrator have the authority to have a memo to say we will not prosecute marijuana cases because we do not agree. >> well, i think the administrator has to write a discretion to say what cases will be prioritized and which ones will not be and how those lower priority cases will be handled. >> i am not talking about a case

by case. the truth is, you already have the authority to decide on a case by case. in other words, there is no need for this memo. it to give you no other authority that you had before you drafted it. it leaves some of us to think that it was a political memo and not a legal one. can you understand the skepticism of some of us? you already have the authority to decide on a case by case basis. why publicize it? by announcing to the world unless it was for political purposes? >> it is the outgrowth of several years. it was a 2010 priority on our memos. there was a 2011 memo on discretion. the move began going case by case through the 350,000 cases in the backlog. we found that in doing so, that was not enough to really clear

out and get out of the huge backlog we had in a lower priority cases. this memo takes the lowest of the low priority cases. >> i am familiar with the policy. my response to that is, if you are right on the policy, then you ought to be able to convince the people who passed the laws that it is a legislative issue executive issue. that is an example of congress saying to the judge, you have the discretion when it comes to sentencing. it will be 60 months for a garden variety regardless of whether you think that ought to be. my guess is when you were the u.s. attorney in arizona, if a judge deported below the guidelines, it would appeal because it was out of their

discretion. my question is, what is our remedy as lawmakers when you ignore laws that have been passed? what is our remedy? to cut off the funding? to direct to you? the explanation i have heard is one of resources, that we do not have the resources to prosecute this category. tomorrow it may be another category case. and the day after, another category case. at first blush, it strikes me that it takes many resources to identify whether your memo applies are not as it would to prosecute the case. how long have they been in the country? what is their educational background? what is their age? do they have a record of serious misdemeanors'? that takes resources. it strikes me -- >> the gentlemen and's time

has expired. the witness has answered the question. >> you and i clearly disagree on what discretion means and how it can be applied. on the resource question, there will be a "the associated press" process in the adjudication of the process. this is not anticipated to be coming out of taxpayer funds. >> the gentle lady from california is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, madame secretary. i want to comment the intellectual property enforcement work, particularly through operation in our sights. the efforts to protect american consumers from top defect drugs that are sold online. you have had some investigations that have been very important

for our area. there was an investigation last year that led to prison sentences for owners of a los angeles jewelry store who illegally imported and sold, perfect designer jewelry. some tested positive for hazardous levels of lead. lab tests showed there is nearly 28% times levels. despite that, these items were labeled "lead-free." you were able to attack a terrible problem there. i also want to applaud you for the announcement with regards to our dream act students who were brought here by their students. they came here without documentation through no fault of their own. they grew up in the u.s. and want to contribute to this country. in fact, we have dream act students right here in the audience. this means a lot to them. the policy will help to ensure

that we do not focused our limited tax care resources on individuals who do not pose a threat to our country. they want to give their part to this country that they call home. the question has to do with immigration courts. as a longtime prosecutor, you know that you cannot enforce a law and prosecute people effectively if you cannot get -- our system is backlogged. there are many of pending cases. if you are an attorney in phoenix who is trying to get a court day, he will have to wait until 2014. in all possible, you have to wait until the year 2016 to even have a schedule for the case. that does not make sense. can you describe what dhs is doing to fix this problem? how was your memorandum clear up

this backlog? >> representative, we have been addressing that. it is a question for dhs andhe department of justice. we have been addressing it through offering administrative closure to a low priority cases that are clogging the backlog. we have been able to offer closer to about 8% of those cases. by what is coming into the immigration court system, making sure that those are a public safety case, the criminals, the recent border crossings, the repeat violators, those are the ones that we prioritize and. those get the full attention. >> let me also ask about the historical precedent prioritize. when the director first issued his priorities in the discretion

memos, some critics attacked the memos as unconstitutional and in violation of the separation of powers doctrine. the same attacks have continued in the wake of your memo. i wonder if you can respond to this claim and describe for us some of the historical precedents for issuing guidance such as this. >> there is a lot of historical president's going back decades. i mentioned a few of the cases. cheney versus heckler. the reason arizona decision of the supreme court is very clear that in the immigration field, we possess and should possess enormous discretion on how to enforce the laws. >> in fact, doesn't chapter 6 of the u.s. code specifically direct you to establish national immigration enforcement policies? >> that is true. >> and may congress, have not

directed you to prioritize serious criminal challenges? >> yes you have. >> aside from congress's direction, hasn't dhs issued similar guidance regarding discussion? >> that is right. they issued a very lengthy memo with all of the president's. that memo was cited by julie me yers. there is a long track record. i think it is important to emphasize what we are trying to do is increase the proportion of those removed from my country, but those of them who are convicted criminals, recent border violators, or repeat violators.

>> the gentle lady's time is expired. the gentleman from arizona has five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, secretary napolitano for being here. the 9/11 commission report and the 2011 bipartisan report by and senators on the massacre said it was a major failure to acknowledge the true enemy explicitly as violent islamist extremism. the dhs office certification said the did not have the minimum essential acquirements for how to collect information about violent, islamist extremism. madame secretary, if you cannot identify your enemy, it cannot

defeat him. multiple agencies knew that a major was communicating with awlaki. political extremists and political correctness seems so extreme. eric holder came before this committee and after being asked numerous times, he refused to acknowledge to our chairman that radical islam could be a factor in the terrorists and threats. i think this kind of political correctness is killing americans. agents inside this administration have told members of this congress that there are often afraid to identify the terrorists and his ideology when the enemy cloaks himself in religion. my question is this -- if an agent inside agency needs to identify the next share and

that agency as the terrorist is motivated by a religious ideology, will that aged be punished? >> no. >> do i have your word on that? >> we look at varying ideologies. the notion that we will not say "terrorists" order "is thomas" is not accurate -- or "islamist" is not accurate. i go to bed at night thinking of how to protect our country. there are individuals of a variety of religions. is honest is certainly one. fromhave ai letter multiple organizations. this letter is addressed to you

and to eric holder enter leon panetta. it demands a purge of all counter terrorism training materials on the grounds that some of the materials reflected poorly on islam. within days, the administration commenced an unprecedented purge of its counter-terrorism materials. an investigation, radical islamist ideology is being purged, along with information about mainstream islam without distinction. essentially, political correctness is prevailing over the recommendations of the 911 report and the bipartisan senate report. has your agency also purged counter terrorism training materials along with the internal discussions that reference radical islamist out ideology and practice? >> not that i am aware of.

>> what about the contents of the letter? >> no, i have not. let me say that there is a lot of training material out there. we are constantly revising and improving based on the intelligence we get and receive and how that is analyzed as to what are the evolving threats against the u.s. but that is not a purge. that is evolution training materials. >> are you aware of the purge within the fbi? >> no. >> thank you for coming by. i appreciate you answering the questions. >> you bet. >> the gentleman yields back his remaining time. >> the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to go back to the feed for the process of will begin in august. is it true there will be a fee waiver process as well so there'll be people who will be able to wave so it will cost the

american tax payers? >> it is not yet final. >> but there will be a fee waiver option? >> there may be a slight exception and may particular very deserving cases. >> ok. there could possibly be a fee waiver in certain instances. >> but let me be very clear, we have not yet decided on this. i do not want the expectation out there but applicants that there will be a broad fever process. >> there'll be more discretion on the part of dhs. >> on a hardship basis. >> the memo you put out shortly after the supreme court ruling was a process of many memos. there was a memo that came out what our two years ago. that was your memo. what is concerning for a lot of us when you are talking about

discretion is what the next memo, out will be in terms of waiting are not allowing the actual prosecution are certain laws that are in the books? will it be the next thank that comes out? -- memo that comes out? what is our remedy as legislators? do we have to in every single law that we passed through congress and that the president signs, do we need to add a clause that says we really need it? you have to enforce these laws? the discretion you are talking about seems like this means that the law has been written and signed with the president does not really mean anything if they have the discretion to disregard them. what we do as legislators to make sure that we get the laws that are passed actually fully enforced by the executive branch.

>> rep, i have been an executive my whole career. it is hard for need to get into the legislative mind-set. i will say that we are enforcing the laws. we removed more people from this country than any prior administration over a similar time period. i get criticized for that. we remove more criminals, repeat violators. more than 90% are in those priorities. that will increase. i think it is totally within discussion about how you take the laws and say, look, no law enforcement has unlimited resources. we have to make decisions. >> do we have to say, look, this law is mandatory. you have to enforce it. is that the route we have to go? judges are not allowed to waive

the minimums that are put in place by the legislatures. this is what i want to get at. when we have a situation when the executive branch does not enforce the law, but provides waivers are deferments or where ever you want to call it, we have a situation where the executive branch because all- powerful. you can wave are not enforce any law that is on the books. i completely and totally destroys the constitutional framework of our country. i guess that is -- i want to jump quickly. the director was testifying last week. you said there were no removal'' for the design attacks was programs. >> for six of them. >> there were seven of the end? >> we could give the actual numbers. it is not a secret.

>> the word "removal" is very specific. you are removing the person. that does not necessarily mean an illegal immigrant was found by that agency that was part of the task force and was handed over but does not actually removed. in 2010, 110 illegal aliens were processed. 74 processed in 2011. how many of those were removed even though they were processed? unnoticed by use -- i noticed that you use the same words here. ice has the discretion they have been using. >> i think the goal of is -- >> the witness may answer the question.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. our goal is to remove those people who have been committing crimes in the country. we use removal as the key number. another comparison you might make is between those task forces and secure communities. we have that in all of the border states. we have literally found thousands of criminals and aggregated felons. effectiveative, costin- way, it is better. >> you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the distinguished than a month for south carolina -- gentleman from south carolina talked about

discussion with you. let me ask you this -- what are you at homeland security doing to ensure that the discretion policies does not result in the release of 17-year-old gained members in our communities? -- gang members in our communities? >> a gang member would not qualify. perhaps i can put that in the book, right? >> if there is an arrest or a felony or a serious demeanor, that person will not qualify. >> i thank you for that. i will answer to my own words into geographical waters that are far extended for my district. that can be harmful exercise,

but i am told that cook county, illinois is a so-called sanctuary that is not cooperate t. they are experiencing a massive wave of gaing-related homicides. how do we alleviate the murder crisis in chicago? >> yes, i agree. >> let's meet go back to the alien minors. what is being done to ensure that alien miners at the border could turn out to be a 17-year- old gang member to not be released in our communities? >> there is guidance and

supervision in the field. there is a delivery system, which i can explain in detail before you or have someone explain to you. it would be our intention to make sure that our agents pick the person up. >> thank you. i think i have time for one more. what about transnational gangs? they are comprised largely of foreign-were nationals. -- foreign-born nationals. is it better to deport them before they commit major crimes rather than after? in 2005, the house passed the legislature altered by mr. sense and to allow for the deportation of all alien gang members. do you support such legislation?

>> i am not familiar with that. i am reluctant to comment on that. >> can you get back to me on that? >> yes. >> thank you. i yield back my time. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentle lady from florida is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. madame secretary, we meet again. i will ask you some very similar questions since the last time we talk. in december responded to my request on how many people have been deported under section 243 b. i believe your letter said that was the last act in getting countries to repatriate and use diplomatic efforts. that was in december. now we are here in july.

have you invoke any? have you recommended an aide to the department of state? >> well, again -- >> it is just a yes or a no. have you recommend any to the department of state? >> again, the information as to which countries are not working with us -- >> i will take that as a no-no. we will move on. i have a lot of questions. a simple yes or no was what i was asking you. if you want to go into further detail, i would love you to respond in a letter. but a yes or no is perfectly satisfactory to whether you have submitted any persons to department of state under to 423 b. >> i will get back to you in writing. >> is it true that agent terry

was hitting a beanbag dined the night he was killed? >> i will get back to you. >> is it true that you have policies for your law enforcement officers on how to respond to active shooters? >> i will get back to you in writing. >> so, you plan to not answer any of my questions this afternoon? >> let me explain -- >> mr. chairman! >> could we please have regular order? >> thank you. >> how to respond to an active shooter -- an active shooter is trying to kill people in a combined our populated area throughout fire arms. i sent a letter once i heard about this. it was reported all over the news. fox reported that the active

sugar forced a design for all employees, civilian and law enforcement officers, and no one should rush into a situation where others could get hurt. here is something from some of the border patrol agents. all immigration officers have been required to watch a video. when i asked, you said they are not designed to mandate law enforcement actions. however, these are your training materials, argonaut? >> they are concerned for a situational awareness. it is consistent with all federal law enforcement. we can supply that to you. >> thank you. the letter i received said that it was not mandated. i have concerns we have a border patrol agent who may or may not have been shooting a beanbag weapon against a very high-powered weapons. you are only to shoot back when

your life is threatened. as a law enforcement officer who has want to protect my community, if i was out and about, even off duty, and someone to start shooting in a populated area or threaten someone's life that was not my own, i would be required to act to stop the aggression and save those lives. i want to make sure that this is not something you are telling your armed law enforcement officers to do to just run and weight and height. and hide.it >> they're trained in the situations. >> again, maybe you need to give your officers that information. they said it was all law

enforcement and civilian employees. >> for different purposes. >> i also look forward to getting your information back b.o for a b threen 243 these are violent criminals. the country refuses to take them back. there are about to commit more crimes. i am concerned that we have an option and it has yet to be employed when we have people being murdered by the very people that have threatened them, done time in jail, and because their country would not take them back, the released into the committee to kill the victim. but time has expired. i yield back. >> the gentle lady's time has expired. the last questioner because i have to be in another meeting.

madame secretary, thank you for appearing before us. we had opportunities to had a conversation before on the other committee. i appreciate your work and your time. i must say as someone who has been involved in immigration law for 30 some years and to was every -- who was a ranking republican believing we had legalization and was disappointed sense, it is very important in the what we do. those see how we act and perhaps take advantage of that. that is why it bothers me a great deal that the president had an opportunity for almost three and a half years to work on efforts by the immigration

reform five months before an election and announces this particular policy. you come forward and tell us that you cannot tell us all the details because it has not been worked out? normally you work out what the details are and then you declare the policy if the intention is to have the work and not just make a political statement. that is my observation of them. it is a disappointment to me. >> i think i disagree with to. >> i presume that you do. >> i assume that you know i would disagree. let me simply say that this was the evolution of a process that began in 2010. >> i'd understand that. congress give you additional funding and directed that it only goes to deportation and removal cases. would not alter your case on discretion? as i a understand, a great deal of what you have stated the policy to be is a consequence of limited budgets and therefore

the necessity to establish priorities. >> so, you are saying if you give me an unlimited pocketbook, but i take it back? is that the question? >> that was not the question. we did additional funding and directed that you use those funds to use for deportation and removal cases. we do still testified that the administration would have the same policy as it announced in the memorandum and the president's announcement at the white house? >> yes. there are plenty of criminal border crossers and repeat violators. more than enough for us to remove from the country. you can give us more money. we will take it. >> even if we give you enough money to cover those people included in the discussion decision? >> i think that is unlikely. it is hard to answer the question. >> i guess you do not want to

answer. i can understand that you disagree with the underlying law. but that is not the basis upon which to hide behind. there is a definition or it is not a case by case up already. it is a broad category that has been established. there has been a statement because we are recovering this group of individuals who through no fault of their own in the u.s., it is in fact almost -- but question is, is anyone at fault for them coming to the u.s.? >> it depends. >> well, there is your policy include not only -- you don't call it amnesty -- let's say it is a refusal to take action under the law. what does it do with respect to

the individuals who brought them here illegally? are they also covered by discretion? >> they may be covered by discussion, but theare not covered by the deferred action memorandum. >> so, what would we believe that? individuals covered by this with respect to the dream act, deportation is deferred. does not extend to the relatives as a matter of policy? >> no. >> parents would not be covered by this? all in the students would stay in the u.s.? the parents would be subject to deportation? >> they would be reviewed under a different standard if the case came to pice. >> so, the likelihood is that they would not be. >> if they had a felony or a serious misdemeanor, they would be removable.

>> one last question. my time is rapidly depleting here. yesterday we had testimony from tsa representatives in another subcommittee about the issue of lessons and ng or checking people. it was brought up that currently, you do not match the list of those who want to apply for a pilot's license with the no-fly list. that seemed to be incongruous that on the no fly list they can't get on the commercial aircraft, but they could go to a pilot training program and not be stopped from doing that. >> the fact of the matter is,

there are lots of different ways a person on the no-fly list would not be in a position to get a private lesson. >> the statement was made on the record yesterday that they are not checked against the no-fly list period. that is disturbing. >> tsa may not be aware of -- >> my time is up. we thank you for your testimony today. there will be questions submitted to you in the riding. i know you will endeavor to get those to us in a timely fashion as we define timinely here. this hearing is adjourned.

>> up next, two political rallies. first, president obama in a retirement community in west palm beach florida. campaigning for mitt romney. later, west and michele bachmann speaking to the eagle forum. >> of russia and china took to be towed a security council resolution and proposing sanctions on syria. we will talk about what is ahead for u.s. policy toward syria. and on our are america by number segment, the census bureau director joins us with new numbers on manufacturing, trade, personal income, and home ownership. smith.rd smitrad

"washington journal" is live on c-span every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. >> it was about those men and women who are injured in the war. because of the huge advances that have been made in medical treatment over the last 10 years, that meant being saved. an incredible number of them being saved. almost everyone who falls on the battlefield is being saved. i wanted to write about what life was like for those people. i want to start with the question of people who were grissom leak maimed, gruesomely beened, would it habve

better if they were dead? >> david wood spoke with families, doctors, and nurses for the daily struggles of those wounded. learn more on sunday at 8:00 p.m. on c-span "q&a." >> earlier touched a, president obama held a campaign rally at a retirement committee in west palm beach florida. he said romney's plan for medicare would hurt seniors. ♪

♪ >> hello, everybody. job of thank you. thank you. everyone have a seat. i want you all to be relaxed. i am excited to be here.

first of all, i want to say that is the most kisses i have gotten at any campaign event. [laughter] that was only half of the crew. i may get some more on the way around here. jawb[applause] i liked that. and every please give him a great round of applause for the great introduction? [applause] there are a couple of other people i want to acknowledge. give the palm beach mayor and big round of applause. [applause] you heard from outstanding congresswoman and the chair of the democrat national committee. >> your own congressman who is

doing a great job looking out for you every day in washington. he is back there somewhere. where did he go? there he is over there. all of you are here. i am excited about that. how is everyone doing today? if so excited to be in century village. everyone is fired up in century village. i am curious how many folks who were originally from my hometown of chicago?

i know there were some white sox fans here. -- i knew there were some white sox fans here. do not talk about the cubs. i have to tell you -- this is my last political campaign. michelle think it is very good. she thinks it is great. she thinks it is great. this will be my last campaign. it caught me kind of nostalgic. i thought about some of my first campaigns. i ran for state senate. was 33 years old. then i ran for the united states sent it. i did not have marine one. i did not have air force one. i did not have anyone driving me around. i was driving my self.

-- myself. i was filling a my own guess. we did not have fancy stuff like gps. if you wanted to go somewhere, you had to get a map. you have to fumble around with it, and try to figure out how to fold it back. when i get to the place i was supposed to be, i had to find my own parking spot. these days, i just pulled up. i would be soaked if it range. i have such great memories of those campaigns. everywhere i went, he would go to inner-city is in the farm towns and suburbs, and people of every walk of life, everywhere i went, i would hear people's

stories. they reminded me of my own stories. if i saw a 70-year-old or a- year-old couple -- 80-year-old -- when my grandfather returned from world war ii, he was able to get an education because of the gi bill. he was able to buy a home with the help of the fha. i am reminded of the greatest generation. everything they did was to help build this nation -- >> we are still here. >> there you go. i would think about my mom. my dad left when i was an

infant. my mom did not have a lot of money. with the help of my grandparents, she was able to work and put herself through school, and give my sister and i a great education. i think about how this country is so great because people have opportunities, even if they do not come from a fancy background. [applause] i would meet a working couple, and i would think about michelle's parents. michelle's father has m.s . he had to wake up one hour earlier than everyone else to get to work. it took a moderate to get to work, but he never missed a day of work -- it took him longer to get to work, but he never missed a day of work. with those modest jobs, they

were able to look after michelle and her brother and send them to some of the best colleges in the country. i thought about how that story was true for some many other families all across illinois. when i began to run for president, i realize that was true all across america. so, the thing that i loved -- who is calling? [laughter] is that michelle? that is because she heard all of those women were kissing me. she got a little nervous. she is being a little jealous. what all of these stories reminded me of is that all

across america, people of every walk of life, black, white, it does not matter where you come from. there is a central idea that makes this country great. the idea that the matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your face, in america -- in america, if you work hard you can make -- your faith, in america if you work hard, you can make it. we do not want handouts. we want to work for what we earn. we want hard work to pay off. we expect that if you put in the effort, you should be able to find a job that pays a living wage. you should not go broke because you get sick. you should be able to send your

children to a good school. you should retire with dignity and respect. you should be able to provide your children, and hopefully your grandchildren, with opportunities that you may not have even imagines that they will do better than you did. that is what america is all about. that is at the heart of the american idea. [applause] i ran in 2008 because that belief that hard work should pay off, it seemed as if that american dream was at risk like never before. for more than a decade, it had been slipping away from too many hard-working people. jobs in factories were shipped overseas. people at the top for doing better than ever, but the middle class, the people who are the

heartbeat of this country -- for those trying to get into the middle class in the form middle- class families, paychecks were getting smaller and bills were getting bigger. in washington, a trend toward dollars were spent on two wars. on wall street, we had a culture of anything goes that led to reckless bets and the worst financial crisis since the great depression. ever since i ran for office, i said it would take more than one year or one term or even one present to solve some of these problems. -- or even one president to solve some of these problems. [applause] [crowd chanting] >> there is so much more

work to do. this may think that much more tougher. when you go through anything as bad as anything since the great depression, a challenge to make sure the economy is moving and people's property values are moving and their homes are back to where they need to be. when i hear people saying that our better days are behind us, i tell them, you do not know the american people. the coverage, the character, the determination of the american people. as i travel across the country, and i meet a small business person who sacrificed some of their own pay to make sure they keep families on the job, or when i talk about some of the auto workers in michigan or ohio, who were not supposed to build cars again, but now they

cannot build them fast enough. [applause] when i meet people in their 50's to go back to community college to sit with a bunch of 20-year- old's, they do not give up because they got laid off. they are finding new jobs in health care or medical technologies. that spirit, that understanding that need -- we may get knocked down, but we always get back up, and we always believed in our capacity to bring about the kinds of changes that keep america moving. that tenacity is undiminished. it is still there. it is still there. there may not be any quick fixes or easy solutions to some of the challenges we face, but we will fix them.

i have every bit of confidence. the problem we have right now is not that we do not have good ideas and things like housing and education, medicare, and social security. the problem is that we have a stalemate in washington. [applause] we have the best scientists, universities, the best system. we have more diversity and talent coming from every part of the globe. every other country on earth would be happy to trade places with us, but we have this stalemate in washington. there are a group of people who want us to go backwards. i do not believe in going backwards. i believe in going forward. i believe in going forward. [applause] i want us to go forward. my opponent and his friends in

congress -- they have an economic plan. it sounds like you have heard the plan. [applause] [laughter] their plan is to cut taxes for the wealthy, cut regulations on banks, insurance companies, unscrupulous investors, and hope that will create more prosperity for everybody. that is a good theory if we had not tried it. we tried it for a decade before i got elected, and it did not work. it got us into this mess in the first place. [applause] i think most of you, like most of america, understands that america works best not with top down economics, but with a

middle-out economics. with a bottom of economics. when everyone has opportunity, everyone does well, including those at the top. that is how we became the most prosperous nation on earth. that is how we built the greatest middle-class in history. it is because i want to restore that basic bargain that i am running for a second term as president of the united states. [applause] [crowd chanting] >> one more year. one more year. >> i am running because i do not believe you can reduce the deficit without asking the wealthiest americans, including people like me, to give up the tax cut that they have been

benefiting from for the last decade. my opponent does not want to just keep those tax cuts. he wants to pile on another $5 trillion. , including a 25% tax cut for every millionaire in the country. wait, it gets better. to pay for this, he would have to cut job training programs for workers, financial aid for our students, raise taxes on the middle class, who can least afford it. he wants to roll back the affordable care act, forcing to,000 flora -- floridan s pay more for prescription drugs. he plans on and turning medicare again to a voucher program. if the thatcher is not worth it takes to buy health insurance in

the private marketplace, you are out of work. you have to make up the difference. you are on your on. one study found that under a similar plan, seniors would have to pay nearly $6,400 for medicare than they do today. -- $6,400 from medicare than they do today. where were you get that from? how many of you think that is a good idea? to finance tax cuts for people who do not need them? florida, that is wrong. it is wrong to ask you to pay more for medicare so that people who are doing well right now it's even more. that is no way to reduce the deficit. we should not be squeezing more money out of our seniors. my plan is to squeeze more money out of the health care system that is being wasted with waste, and abuse, and fraud. we have been cracking down on

medicare fraud harder than just about anybody because of those dollars should be going to you and your terps, not the people who are cheating the -- and your care, not the people who are cheating the system. let me tell you -- there are some government programs that do not work. we cannot afford to waste money. we are willing to cut spending on stuff that is not helping the middle class or help us grow. -- helping us grow. we have to make sure everyone is doing their fair shape -- share. the way i am talking about, we tried that to under a guy named bill clinton. we created 22 million new jobs. we had a surplus. medicare was protected. social security was protected. [applause] by the way, wealthy people did

pretty well, too. when middle-class families are doing well, and they have money in their pockets, they are spending it with the local restaurants. businesses have more customers. they hire more workers. you get a virtuous cycle where everyone does well. that is the recipe for success. this is not the only place where autoe a different fromrwe talke industry. mr. romney said, let's let the courts go bankrupt. there were 1 million jobs at stake. i said, no, let's bet on american workers, american manufacturers. now gm is number one again. chrysler and ford are on the move. [applause] i want to make sure that what we did with the auto industry,

let's do it with manufacturing across the country, right here in florida, all across the country. let's put people back to work. one of the ways we can do it is instead of getting tax breaks to companies shipping jobs overseas, let's give jobs to countries -- companies that are investing in the united states and hiring american workers. i want to sell goods around the world that are made in america. [applause] that is what i believe. i am running because after a decade of war, it is time for us to do some nation-building at home. america is safer and more respected because of the unbelievable service of our troops. and because of their efforts, we ended the war in iraq, as i promised. we have been able to refocus on al-qaida and those who have cost

911. we decimated their leadership and took out osama bin laden. [applause] we have been able to set a time line to end the war in afghanistan. we have strengthened our alliances and said with countries that share our values. i know a lot people here care about the state of israel. we a heartbroken. it is an important time to talk about this because of the barbaric attack that happened in bulgaria. young people are being killed because of this ruthless terrorist attack. i want to know under my administration, we have not just preserved the unbreakable bond with israel. we have strengthened -- we have stood by israel pulls the side in the face of criticism. our corporation has never been

closer. this is a moment of great uncertainty in the middle east, given what is happening in syria and other places. now is the time to make sure that we are doing everything we can to protect israel's security. i want you to know that that is something that should transcend parties. that is not a republican or a democratic issue. that is an issue of how we work with one of our closest allies in the world that shares our values and beliefs in democracy. our homeland is safer because of the strength of our armed forces. we have to take care of our own responsibilities. the idea that anybody who were the uniform of the united states

armed forces is homeless right now is unacceptable. [applause] the notion that they should be fighting for a job or a roof over their heads after having fought for us is unacceptable. that is why we are going to meet that sacred trust and make sure every veteran gets the care that they have earned and the services that they have earned. that is one of the reasons i am running for a second term as president of the united states of america. [applause] [crowd chanting] >> one more year. >> one more year. one more year. -- one more year. one more year. >> there is more. there is more work to do. i want to take about half of the

savings that we have been spending on war. let's rebuild america. let's look -- put workers back to work, rebuilding our roads and bridges. rebuilding our ports. i took a step today that will shave years off of the renovation of the jacksonville port. there are ports that are gateways to commerce and jobs. we want to accelerate those things. it is important for the local economy as well as for the american economy. we used to have the best death, the best airports, the best response. we have been slipping because we have not been making those investments. you know what happens when you defer maintenance. if you do not fix the roof, what happens? it will cost you more later on. why would we not want to put people back to work right now rebuilding america? that is good for the economy and for our future.

[applause] i am running to make sure america once again has the best education system in the world. i want our schools to hire and reward the best teachers, especially in math and science. i want to get 2 million more americans the chance to get trained in a minute -- community colleges. i want universities to bring down their tuitions. so young people are not loaded up with that. -- debt. higher education is an economic necessity. you need an advanced degree of some sort to get into the middle class. we have to make it affordable for all of our young people. me and mitt romney have a lot of differences. i mentioned a few. .

in florida, we are concerned that the housing market is weak. you are starting to sea susee se signs of water. mr. romney's plan is to let the market bottomed out. that is not a solution. that is a problem. we have already helped millions of responsible home owners refinance at lower rates. i am running to make sure everyone can refinance and save about $3,000, money in your pocket that you can use to build that the equity in your home or spend it at a local business, which will further strengthen the economy. that is the difference between me and mr. romney. [applause] it was the right thing to do to pass health care reform. all of you know -- all of you

know what it means to have security when it comes to your health care. a lot of people may already be on medicare, but imagining if you had been on monday and ended up getting laid off at the age of 55 or 57. maybe you have already had an illness, and you are trying to re-enter the workforce, but it is taking a long time. you lose your health insurance. or you get a job that does not offer health insurance. maybe you are a small business person, but because of a pre- existing condition, you cannot get it. it cost so much, you cannot afford it. that is not right. that is not who we are. that is why we passed the affordable care act. it was the right thing to do. the supreme court has now spoken, and we will implement this plan because we are moving forward. we are not going backwards.

. [applause] we are not going to backwards what it comes to telling servicemembers that they cannot serve this country because of who they love. e had -- we ended don't ask, don't tell, and it was the right thing to do. we will not go backwards when it comes to the need for immigration reform. we have a country full of immigrants. we need to have a smaller system that says, those who are willing to work hard, you have a chance to succeed here in america, just like previous generations. [applause] whether it is bringing manufacturing or construction jobs back, projecting -- protecting health care, are making sure grandchildren can

stay on their parents' insurance plan, are making sure that our veterans are cared for, or that young people can afford college. all of these things go back to that idea that if you work hard, you can make it in this country. you can get ahead. that is the promise that our parents and grandparents made us. that is what we have to pass on to our kids and grandkids. over the next four months, the other side will spend more money than we have ever seen. they will have a bunch of ads with scary voices. most of what you hear, you can pretty much go mute. just pressed mute button.

-- the mute button. that is the good thing about the vermont. or you can fast-forward it. you do not have to pay much attention because the ads will say the same thing over and over. they -- the other side knows they cannot sell their economic plan because we tried it, and it did not work. everybody remembers that. instead, they will say, the economy is still bad. it is obama's fault. it does not matter what is on the screen. you know that is what they are saying. some of the pictures of me will be unflattering. [laughter] my face is all distorted. once i is all droopy. -- one eye is all droopy. i look all grim. you know what they are saying.

that may be a way -- their plan to win an election, but it is not a plan to create jobs. it is not a plan to revitalize the middle-class or actually move this country forward. frankly, i would be worried if this was my first campaign, but i have been to this rodeo before. one of the things that disney continents is you. -- that gives me confidence is you. the american people know to cut through some nonsense. this is kind of a wild crowd. [laughter]

>> we got your back. >> what gives me hope is you because just like in that first campaign, when i travel around the country, i constantly hear stories that are just like mine, my family's stories. all of the struggles that the previous generations went through. people coming over here as immigrants the. . despite hardwick and disappointments, when you think about all of those who travel through ellis island, they did not know what they would find. they knew there was something special about this country. no matter how hard it was, no matter how tough, they kept on going. they kept on working. they understood that this was a country where people were free

to pursue individual trains, but people would come together as a country. -- dreams, but people would come together as a country. we take pride in individual initiative. we do not like handouts. we do not expect government to solve every problem. the government should not help people who do not want to help themselves. that gi bill that educated so many people -- we did not have to get it. but we did get together. the hoover dam, the golden gate bridge. we built that to get there. the internet was created because of investments that we need to get there. that is how we sent a man to the moon, together. we are not going to abandon those values and the traditions that ultimately made this the country that we love. so, when we tap into those

values that we know our rights, and all of that other negativity does not matter. all of that stuff on not impact the election. it will be up to you. the choice will be up to you. >> we choose to. -- you. [applause] >> if you are ready to work, then i am confident about this election. you are going to break the stalemate and get things back on track. in 2008, i am -- i told you i am not a perfect man. i would -- i said i would not be a perfect president. what i said was -- i always told

you where i stood. i always told you what i thought. i will wake up every day fighting as hard as i knew how for you. [applause] fighting for you. thinking about you. i see myself in you. i see myself. i see my grandparents. i see my children in you. we are part of that same story. when i am fighting for you, i am fighting for my children and their future. that is why i have been able to keep their promise. i still believe in you. if you still believe with me, and you are still willing to work with me, and make phone calls with me, i promise you we will win florida, we will win this election, and together we will finish what we started and remind the world what america is

the greatest nation on earth. god bless you, everybody. god bless the united states of america. [applause] ♪ >>[no audio] ♪ >> i have been knocking on the door >> more "road to the white house" coverage tomorrow. that is live on c-span. then my at 6:00 p.m. eastern, michelle obama delivers a

campaign speech in fredericksburg, virginia. jeb bush yesterday campaigned for mitt romney in a higher -- ohio. he said that when it comes to the economy, president obama does not get it. >> the big fans will not be installed until tomorrow. that is the truth. they were scheduled for this morning. i am the presence of the united performance metals. we are a division of o'neill steel perry is the vargas family owned service center in the u.s.. -- still company in the u.s..

heart of the u.s. manufacturing. in this building, we cut, edge, metal and sellshear to companies in many of the key u.s. industries that create jobs that allow us to export and bring dollars home to the u.s. we -- u.s. manufacturing -- create opportunities that lead to the great quality of life for many americans. today i speak for the all male i am concerned with the u.s. apologies -- policies. i have started multiple personal

businesses. some felt, some more successful. to create jobs, you have to have policies that are for growth and record business success. otherwise, to take that first -- any time you start a bills it -- business, that is a big step. it is too great a risk -- or not worth it -- if you do not have the support. i have traveled the world to visit many manufacturing facilities. i can tell you that countries china, are running the companies like a business. they are competing to win. they are winning. go back to shanghai, china. the infrastructure they have is very clear that they have a path

that is winning. they are not fighting amongst themselves. they are focused on their objectives that stimulate growth. our country needs to be run like a business. it needs a strategic plan. it needs 18 to be on the pay -- same page to execute those rigidities 18 to be on the same page to execute those projected needs a team to be on the same page to those plans. you need to reward that success. today, the policies and actions of our governments have created uncertainty. it is impacting businesses all over the world. relief turned from an air show. it was in -- we returned from an air show. is -- the uncertainty is

starting to impact. we are starting to change because of that impact. i can tell you firsthand that we are filling this affect. they are starting to manage their business to save cash and pay for this uncertain future. we feel it. it will impact the daily lives of others if we do not change things. we need business-friendly leadership with actual business experience understands small business, manufacturing, innovation, and the respect for the entrepreneur. governor romney does that. it is my pleasure to introduce someone who create jobs in the private sector. party serving as a two-term -- party serving as a two time- presence in florida, he worked in various sectors. i have no doubt that with these experiences, he has built a keen

sense on how government can build jobs and succeed and celebrate the success. governor bush health reform for our school system. he comes from a great family. please welcome governor jeb bush. [applause] >> thank you, tom. thank you to the employees of a . we will be brief. it is a joy to bet here toom. tom, thank you for your leadership. i want to give you a polish family of state. sometimes people ask about how my parents are doing. my dad is doing pretty good. he is 88 years old. he is not walking the way he used to, which is a pressing for a guy as vital as him. he is doing well -.

my mom has advised me to tell you that he is younger than my dad. she runs the show in the bush family. we also loot. -- we also lose. once parents get past the age of 85, they lose that break inside their minds. they say what they believe. it is a joy to be with them. it is fun if you wait for the next thing to be said. they are doing well. my older brother is doing pretty well. [applause] about a year ago, he wrote a book, which surprise a lot of people. then, he went on a book tour. he sold 2.6 million copies. it was on the new york times best-seller look -- it was on

the ""the new york times"" bestseller list. he called all my mom to brag -- list.ellerhe new yo he brought to my mom. everyone is -- he bragged to my mom. everyone is doing well in the bush family. i want to talk about why it is important to elect mitt romney as our next president of the united states. there are a lot of positive reasons to support mitt romney. i want to give you a reason why it is important. the current president of the united states does not get it. he said on monday, right before he came here to this part of ohio, if you have a business, you did not build it. someone else make it happen. that is like saying that the private sector is doing pretty

good. it is the economy that is doing bad. he has had no practical experience in creating jobs. he has a belief that government owns the resources of the country. when we take them, somehow it is taking them rather than through hard work and the dynamic interaction, creating innovation that creates jobs. somehow, it is the government. when people are successful, they have some obligation to the government to give it back. that is what he said. it is nike to say that because the greatness of our country does not come for -- is not need to say that. the greatness of our country comes from 300 plus million people interacting among themselves. that dynamic interaction has created the greatest of our country. it is not our government. government has a useful role to play. i have not become a libertarian.

it is a role that needs to be limited. we need to celebrate the efforts for success that exist in this country that has created the greatness. tom is a great example. he worked for ge. he sought an idea, a niche that could be felt in a different way by starting up his own business. tom deferred gratification. he did not take many vacations when he had this idea. he had to find a partner to invest in his dreams. look how big the dream is now. he took chances. he may not have been successful in a way that was one step four, one step forward. it may have been one step toward, three steps back. he took a risk. he borrowed the money. he did not take a salary. he did the things that entrepreneurs do. this is competitive globally.

-- this business is competitive globally. it impacts cincinnati area families. that is america. it is not getting a loan because you have political access in the department of energy for a failed solyndra. on the capitalism needs to be rejected in our country. we need to restore on to pinero capitalism where government pays -- placed in -- on japan -- entrepreneurial capitalism were government plays a role. i am tired of the president of the 90 states with the awesome still that he gets to go -- the president of the united states trying to create divisions, trying to punish people rhetorically for the hard work that will restore american greatness. my train is that we create --

lead the toms of the world throughout our country. that we create the creek -- correct business client requirements of the campus to visit pursue their dream with a business -- pursue their dream of a business. that will create jobs for the middle class when we need it. -- at a time when really need it. [applause] the president's approach has created the loss of 23 million jobs for underemployed people for people that have given up hope. we have 23 million americans that do not have a job or have given up looking, or are under employed when they once were a ploy. -- employed. 66,000 net jobs have been lost in all hyacinths obama has been elected. -- in ohio since obama has been elected. the slowest recovery in modern

time in america. the policies of higher taxes, of more government, of more involvement in the rogatory -- religious right climate -- regulatory climate, has created a morass. it has created a sense of a dark cloud that can be lifted by restoring american greatness, and pricing -- embracing american values. that is what romney will do on day one. if you focus on economic growth being the unifying principle of our country, you can achieve great things. our growth is around 1.5%, and most economists believe if we continue these policies, 1.5% is about as good as it will get in the next decade. that does not create a climate

for sustained job creation and higher wages for people that want to live independent lives as they see fit. if we grew at 2% more, which is achievable here, if we grew at report% -- a figure at 3% or more, a lot of the problems that exist in our country would change. a 2% marginal increase in growth for 10 years compounded over the next decade would create a germany in the 10th year. $3.70 trillion of additional economic activity. it seems to me it is a worthy aspiration to change the course of our country by expiring -- aspiring to a high-growth solution to the problems we face. mitt romney is well qualified. with his practical business experience to lead us in that way. he would create an energy plan

that we would be growing our economy because we would embrace our own resources rather than importing them from karpov -- far off places. the xl pipeline will be approved on day one under the romney administration. incentive for the use of natural gas -- and sentenced for the use of natural gas -- incentives for the use of the natural gas would be present. i love my iphone and ipad. perhaps, the greatest innovation in the last 20 years is the use of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling that is creating -- fracking and horizontal drilling that is creating industry. you can imagine an energy

strategy that allows us to have the lowest cost energy where we could have a rebirth of manufacturing in our country. the use of natural gas and other innovative means to be able to jump-start our economy. we need 20% to regulation. who better than a cat that understands how to get from point a to point b. -- who better than a guy that understand how to get from point a to point b. it can be done. if we have a president who believes that the way to solve problems is to impose an uncertainty through massive resolutions -- regulations, ne thinking that is the measurement of your commitment to our country. that means jobs will be created

overseas. that is the problem we face. mitt romney needs to be reelected so we can build a dynamic work force an economy that will allow us to grows bigger on a sustained basis. mitt romney will be an advocate for free but fair trade. he will enforce the trade agreement so if there are places around the rock that are abusing the relationship with the united states -- around a rock that are abusing the relationship with the united states, the president will fight on behalf of u.s. jobs and the u.s. industry. ies. romney will realize the federal government does not have the luxury to live out of its means. for every dollar spent it has 40 cents being debt. no one can do that on their own family budget. if tom tried to do that, he would be a dead when -- dan met -- dead man walking. why do we think it is

sustainable for our federal government to spend at this rate? it is unconscionable. we are saying that the next generation of americans will have a debt load so they that they will not be able to pursue their dreams. i am an old guy that believes every generation should have more opportunities than last. we cannot control spending. that may not be the case. mitt romney is a guide to begin to turn that around before it is too late. -- the person to begin to turn that around before it is too late. certainty and their taxes that are easy to understand will create a burst of energy in our country that will allow us to lift the cloud. i want a president that believes on american entrepreneurship. i hope you will do everything you can in a high yield.

there are two states that matter florida and ohio. if we do our part in florida, and you do your part and ohio, i believe mitt romney will be the net president of the united states. the restoration of america will begin. thank you very much. >> mitt romney campaigns in new hampshire. that is live on c-span. as 6:00 p.m. eastern, michelle obama delivers a campaign speech in fredericksburg, virginia. alan west and michelle bachman spoke today to college students in washington. mr. west talked about pentagon spending cuts. said the muslim

brotherhood has infiltrated the u.s. nation. >> this is the biggest and the best collegiate summit we have ever had. we have about 100 colleges represented. our plan is to have all of the speakers keep their speech to 15 minutes so we can have 15 minutes of questions and answers. i want to be interactive. with questions. we have a role of one breath questions. you can ask a question that you can fit into one breath. we hope the congressmen and other speakers will keep their answers short so we can hear from as many people as possible.

it is more fun if we have a lot of questions. the questions will be short. the response -- the responses will be short. we want everyone here to be a part of the program. impressed with the men who are here in coats and ties. thank you for realizing this is an important event. the form has made quite a place for itself and the american political scene. i hope you will like it and be part of it and be politically active so we can save our country from the people who are trying to change as into something that looks like europe. that is not what we want. that is where obama is trying to take us. we do not want to be here. our first congressman is here. let's have a quick prayer.

>> heavenly father, we recognize you as creator this morning. we cannot help but stan awe as we look around our a -- stand and awe as we look at our nation's capital. we asked you would threat -- bless this day. i pray you would give the student ears to hear a message today. help us stand for truth wherever you have put us. i pray this in jesus' name. >> thank you. i told you we would have our favorite members of congress. , allen was of florida has a -- allen west of florida has arrived on time. he has his bachelor's and master's degree in political science. he has a master's of military arts and sciences. he served in the army for 22 years.

after retiring from the military, he got elected in 2008 to serve as a congressman from florida's 22nd district. he is on the house armed services committee. he is also on the small business committee. he has made a name for himself. we are proud that he is here today. please welcome congressman alan west. [applause] where are you? i was passed a note that he was here. >> i think a lot of people want to talk to him. he will be here in just a moment. >> he is here somewhere. >> i cut my announced in short, but in your packet you will see a social media contest. we are hoping for meaningful interaction between students here and speakers who are speaking. we are going to give away a fun

prize. it is a mini camcorder that has a drive for you can predict that you can put into your computer to share videos easily. -- that you can put into your computer to share videos easily. we will give that out on friday to the student who has a quantity of social media interactions that are meaningful. brian o'neill will tons -- a judge that context. -- that contest. the second contest we will have is for t-shirts. if you ask a question, you'll get a ride ticket parent -- a red ticket. every ticket will enter into a drawing for a tickets. make sure you get a ticket for every question you ask them i hope you all understood that. i did not --.

-- asked. you understandstoo>> i hope that. that is the generational we want to reach many people. i do not understand. they told me he was here. he must be bogged down with some of his fans outside. anyway, are you all happy and here on time? thank you for coming. i wanted to socialize with other students. this is the most attractive students. [laughter] we thank you. there is a spectacular web site.

it is the best in the conservative movement. the goal in mind is information. if you are on our e-mail list, you'll get notices of alerts. congressman west is here. everybody clap so we can clap again. [applause] we thank you. >> thank you. once again, it is truly an honor to be here at the eagle forum. she has been on this battlefield for quite some time. i am honored that she would allow me to be there with her on the front lines. they wanted me to talk about a little bit about the military. the army to talk about military

superiority. i was reminded of a little line i had when they talk about the law of the sea treaty. that is coming up in the senate. one of the best ways to make sure that you have a good law of the sea treaty is to go -- is to have a good navy. it continues to be a vicious cycle. go back to world war i. what do we do it the military? we gutted the military. what happened after world war i? we had world war ii. what happened up did that? -- after that? we sent them to korea and after that vietnam. i was in desert storm. it increased hundredfold for our military. we have to understand that we cannot look at our military for

fiscal responsibility in -- responsibility -. the absence of war is not peace. i wish we would understand that. another thing we need to realize is that the world is truly -- if you have not read the kant, read "the prince." we have to recognize those three simple words out of bed and put forward ring true for ever and ever it -- ronald reagan put forward and that is peace through strained. look at the volatility and the craziness that is going on across the globe. the u.s. is not portraying its strength. yesterday i sat down with some

representatives from the free syria movement. the top of the u.s. coming to their aid. the top of the u.s. getting involved and providing them -- they talked about the u.s. get involved and providing them with aid. we're sitting here and arguing about what we will do about our military. we want to send 200,000 men and women at home. but now we're talking about moving it to a level we have not seen since 1940. we will take nab down to a level it has not been two since 1915. we will take our air force to a level very low. we need the u.s. military. we do not have a credible military threat now. we have men and women who have been on five or six combat tours of duty. we turn over to our special operators who have very nearly

defined mission said. then we believe they are the soup du jour when it comes to anything happening over there. sen this and send that. that is not the point. what we have built to do is look at the world broken-down with the geographical aors. look at from the 10 to 15 years, what are the emerging threats? base and build a capacity based upon that. what we end of doing with the u.s. military is, here is $20. did out how you protect the u.s. it cannot be but-based. it has to be based on the threat that is out there. -- it cannot be budget-based. it has to be based on the threat that is out there. look at china and that trade and

balance they have. the hold 28% of our debt. the growing economy is not going improving the standards of living of the chinese citizen. there looking at increasing their military capability. be world's this may be will finding under chinese flags. but what are we doing with our navy? in the 1990's, we had some 500 are 600 work naval vessels. ealing have about 283. sequestration to set down to 230. a majority of the earth is water. tracing back to every great civilization, everyone has understood that the means by which you truthfully extend the power and the dominance of a nation is through the navy.

but what are we doing to ours? what are we doing to our maritime forces? that is the message you are sending out to the world right now. look at north korea and the actions they take. it is based on the fact that they believe china has their back. china has much of our debt. look at what is happening in venezuela. president obama says they are not a threat. why are the missile sites being placed in venezuela? you have missiles that are in place and venezuela can threaten us down in south florida. look at what is going on in somalia. but at what is gone on in northern africa. but the what is going on in nigeria. look at the situation in egypt. who feels that leadership in egypt a year ago? we tried to get them to

understand what the muslim brotherhood was. it said they would not run a presidential candidate. they did run a presidential candidate and that person won. all of a sudden for the first time in 35 or 40 years, you have terrorist attacks, out of the desert. there are terrorists insurers be established in the desert. the had to bring out forces and put them along the southern border. not to mention the failure with the mandate 1701. it was supposed to prevent hezbollah from rearming. they are capable of striking every single city in israel. we know what they are doing every day. rocks and missiles are being fired into southern israel. and now the situation in syria. why? we're not portraying strength.

the world needs a strong america. it is not about us trying to be an empire. it is about as understanding that we are the beacon of freedom, liberty, and democracy. we are the ones that others depend upon. so, is military superiority a very important thing for the u.s.? is it the key to peace? it is. the need to have a credible military. it is part of the national power that you have. you have diplomatic power. you have economic power. look at our debt and deficits, the economic has failed. you must have military power. what we as constitutional conservatives need to be honing

in on -- i was listening to the washington journal today. they're talking about mitt romney's tax returns. the not talking about economic security of this country. they're not talking about national security. we are on the cusp of having a hollow military. they are talking about mitt romney's tax returns. this is such a threatening position. let me put it in historical context. the u.s. first went into world war ii, pearl harbor [inaudible] the first army sent to north korea was decimated. we have a bad habit of not being able or prepared for the next major combat operation. here we are putting ourselves in

a position, our best and brightest, our greatest resource of this country, in a horrible situation. in 2003 when i deployed my battalion to iraq, we did not have enough body armor. we had some humvees that did not have doors on them. that is not have the u.s. projects power and strength. we need to have a strong military. we cannot look at the military and say that this lighting -- this little percent of our budget -- there are some politicians to do not have the courage to stand up and tell the american people what needs to be said. the number one responsibility of the federal government is to provide for the common defense. the constitution.

-- read it. we need to be protecting the american people. go back and look at food stamp spending. we have gone from $20.6 billion to $75.8 billion a year on food stamps. the want to take it to $80 billion. but we will turn to our men and women in uniform and say, you are not worth the investment to keep us safe and secure. that is reprehensible. we need to have men and women who have been on the battlefield to come and make the right strategic levels in washington, d.c. with that said, what are your questions? [applause]

>> another one to ask you some questions. i was glad to hear your use the word military superiority. ed is not just being strong, it is being superior. those words used to be on the republican platform. they are not now. help me put those words back in the republican platform by telling delegates what to do. >> you're absolutely right. there is a little loan fact that a lot of people are not paying attention to. if we did not pay attention, this to be the first election cycle where we have a sitting president and vice president and a candidate -- i think this is the first time. how will you be able to articulate the military

superiority? that is not just about bullets and ammunition and guns. it is about the full spectrum of military operations, intelligence dominance, things of that nature. once upon a time, you had 75-85% of congress that served in the military. now i think we are down to less than 12%. that has a reflection on the priorities of this country. >> question. >> in your personal opinion, [inaudible] >> you have to do go back and look at what are the right response abilities of the federal government. i disagree with the president would visas that people are out there creating businesses and running businesses and having --

i disagree with the president that people are out there creating businesses and running businesses. what you are really saying is that we own you and me on your resources. we have to unleash the individual entrepreneur spirit. america is about the federal government should be focused on the things the individual cannot provide for themselves. when you start to look at it in that perspective then you understand what are the responsibilities of the federal government? the federal government in and of itself has gotten too big. it has become a bureaucratic nanny state. we are starting to get away from the things that are necessary for the function of this government.

if you read the book democracy in america, it talks about when congress gets the point where it can drive the public by using the public treasury, this is what you have. you have this exorbitant growth of the federal government. we are promising more and more largess to the american people. how does that work out? how did it work for greece or italy or ireland or spain? i know we are on c-span right now. this is the question you should always posed to liberals. where has what you believe in ever been successful in the world? [applause] >> who has got a mike? >> thank you for being here.

could you give us some insight, i believe it was last year, president obama had met with jewish leaders behind closed doors at the white house. could you give us some insight as far as what you think, whether or obama's support for israel is one of the biggest things? >> i don't speculate. as president of the united states of america, how many times has he been to israel? how many times has he been to give major speeches in islamic countries? in turkey and in cairo. i think that you see what the ramifications thereof. that is what i look at, your actions. those actions have not let us to believe that israel is truthfully our greatest allies.

there are some issues about the fact that israel is looking to have launched bases in azerbaijan. they need the bunker busting munitions, aerospace clearance. those are the kind of things that have to happen. once again we are not showing a strong supporter of israel, so therefore the other actors in that neighborhood are starting to rise up against them. >> thank you for being here. my question is on syria. some are saying our lack of involvement is showing that we don't really have power or influence in the middle east. what do you see over future in syria and what could we possibly do? >> i will tell you this. if you recall the president when he came to making his

announcement about the troop withdrawal from iraq, his opening line was, i have kept my campaign promise. general alston, the commanding general in iraq at the time, ask for 15,000 of a residual force. the next thing you know he is totally 0. now we have left a vacuum in iraq, and guess who is in syria? iran and the revolutionary guard. they were able to transit through. again, this is the shortsightedness of our foreign policy and national security policy which promoted what has happened in syria because iran is extending their regional heads. you have to be careful about what has happened in syria. on one side you have bashar al- assad, you have iran supplying

weapons. on the other side you do have freedom fighters. do we really know who they are, do we know there structure? what is the strongest political group in syria? that is the key question. the next thing is you have al qaeda operating there, and you have turkey seeking to become the next islamic hegemony. whose side you come in on? that is the question have to come in on -- that is the question you have to ask yourself. if you don't have a credible military presence, it will not be able to get their attention. my biggest concern is that if we get involved in syria, and it starts to resemble 198411 on -- 1984 in lebanon. the next thing you know, while

they are asleep in their barracks, a truck bomb rolls through because they are not allowed to have a magazine in the well of their m-16, and the terrorists saw that. what is the new, free syrian going to look like? i do not want to see the massacres that are going on. i do not want to see but zarrella shot stay in position. -- i do not want to see assad stay in position. >> glad to have you here. i did have a question about, as we work towards maintaining u.s. military superiority, how do we ensure that that superiority is

used to deal with keeping the security of the united states intact and not being used as a global police force for companies that have nothing to do with u.s. interests? >> that is where you have to have individuals with an understanding of three levels of workfare, strategic, operational, and tactical. they know what it means to employ the military. first we have to protect the sea lanes of commerce. the suez canal is a concern for me, when you look at what is happening in the straits of hormuz. we have to develop a full spectrum of energy resources here so we don't have to be so concerned about the straits of hormuz and we can take away that threat. when you look at what is going on with china as well, the biggest threat is taiwan, and taiwan is looking to us to be

able to provide some type of assistance. that is very important in the pacific rim as well as vietnam and the philippines. we have to sit down and look at this by geographic area. you start to look at what are the emerging threats you would have to contend with in the next 10 or 15 years in your capacity to contend with those threats. the 21st century battlefield is unlike any other battlefield we face. it is centered on non state that have no respect for international borders are what have you. you have to have a totally different type of mind-set. we need to move away from may forward deployed top of military. kind of a cold war holdover, we need to go to a power projection

type of military. the quick strike type of forces you can use, an expeditionary mind-set. that is what we have to start looking at. it really is a reworking of our strategic level posture of our military so that we can be flexible along the entire spectrum from low intensity to high intensity, if it ever comes to that. i don't believe anyone is willing to take on a militarily superior united states on the battlefield. be very careful. you can say that nigeria may not have any effect on the united states of america, but it speaks to your values when you have a christian community of there being murdered.

you have to understand the concerns that can have on the global markets as well. it is back to us having our own energy independence. i am not one that thinks we need to send the u.s. military all over to quell every single uprising or conflict, but i think as ronald reagan said, you cannot have peace through strength. >> the eagle forum has worked very hard to defeat the law of the sea treaty and looks like we may win that battle. would you like to comment on that? >> i am on the house of representatives side so we do not have -- we cannot see our sealanes and waterways to this international organization. that very much concerns we. we have this international gun law coming up as well.

i do not want to see us lose our relationship as far as being able to be a sovereign nation and being able to dictate what we do as far as operating on the open seas, and of course those waters that are close into our shoreline. i am hoping that the law is defeated in the senate. this is something that have been working on for quite some time. >> you don't think a bunch of bureaucrats in jamaica should make those decisions for us? >> i have to be careful about this because i am married to a jamaican. [laughter] and her cousin happens to be a member of their parliament. they may not let me go down on vacation. i think we have to be a sovereign nation and we cannot allow other countries -- i am

not messing with to make a. we cannot allow other countries to dictate our policies and make a subservient to their whims. >> i have a question. these young people sitting in front of you, the media has portrayed college campuses and their use of this nation as being totally behind the left and obama. what do you tell these young men and women who are excited and proud to be who they are and represent what they are? they can make the media understand there is a large conservative youth base that can put barack obama out of office in november. >> i would tell you that the whole nature of hope and change is going to become divide and conquer. a lot of young people back in 2008 you are sitting at home and their mom and dad's basement and do not have a job, they feel the

american dream is slipping away. what you all represent is the next generation of constitutional conservatives that understand that this is a republic and that the rule of law must be adhered to and we must maintain that individual sovereignty. it is hard on college campuses right now. i note it is. -- i note it is. continue to stand on principle with courage and conviction. what you believe then is the fundamental basis of this nation. go back and read the declaration and the u.s. constitution. that is who we are. it means that the gun man like myself born in the inner city of atlanta can grow up and have a 22-year military career in combat and be a member of the u.s. house of representatives, and stand here before you with phyllis schlafly. part of our dna as americans is

that we pass on to the next generation the blessing of liberty, freedom, and democracy. ron reagan talked about it. freedom is only one generation away from being lost. it is something we passed through in the bloodlines of this great nation. that is why i looked out upon the wall, and i have two daughters, 19 and 15. you are our future. the media does not want to admit that you exist. george soros just put a $5 million price tag on my head. the thing is this. use your social media. get your message out on youtube, facebook, twitter. connect with others so that people know that there is another voice out there. we have to have the continue throughout all of our age

groups, all of the demographics. this thing that you all believe in, this thing that eagle forum promotes, limited government, fiscal responsibility, free- market, traditional cultural values, strong national defense. that is what makes america great. >> wait for the mike. >> for those of us who are going into the military, what would you have to say to us? any advice or areas that we should be aware of? >> pay attention to your training, watch your step, and always take care of your teammates. that is it. are you going in through rotc? which branch? >> marine corps. >> why not an army man?

they have the cool uniforms. the chicks dig the uniforms. plus, you guys have great commercials. i commend you for that. in my family, i am the third or fourth generation of military servicemen. thank you for carrying on the desire to want to defend this great nation. the first thing you need to look for is your platoon sergeant and listen to him. he will make you a great second lieutenant, which means you will be a great captain. then listen to the first sergeant who will make sure you become a great maj. always take care of your marines. >> i have a similar background, i grew up in the inner city and

did junior rotc. my message to get out to the community in the inner city and preach the conservative message. how can i do that effectively and fight the liberals who may say it is cruel and unusual punishment? >> for whatever reason, our fellow americans who are liberals would rather see more people waited to government than being out there and being successful on their own. high school rotc set me on the path i am on today. i remember my for high school rotc instructors. i will never forget those men. they developed a sense of leadership in me. why would anyone disagree with that? men and women who have served in combat, to go back into our high

schools and inner-city center i to teach honor, integrity, and character and selfless service to our young people. that is what we have to understand. there are two different governing philosophies at war in the united states of america. one is that a constitutional republic and one is of a socialist, egalitarian, welfare and nanny state. the latter cannot be the way forward for this country. when i look at the inner cities, when you look at 14.4% unemployment in the black community, when you look at the fact that you have over 40% unemployment for black teenagers, my wife is a brilliant woman. we have been married for 23 years. black families, kids with the mother and father in the home, 28%. something is going very wrong in

this country, and that is the truth that has to get out. >> we are depending on you. [applause] >> he has met a great name for himself in congress and we are very proud of his service. our next speaker has arrived, congresswoman michele bachmann. before she entered politics, she was very busy as the mother of five children and she had 23 foster children in her home. i had six children, but i don't know if i could have dealt with 23 foster children. in her spare time, she was a tax litigation attorney. she has become one of the real leaders of the conservative movement, demanding that we must repeal obamacare. she was first elected to the

minnesota state senate where she was a big supporter of all of our views about the taxpayer bill of rights and education. then she was elected to congress in 2006. she is one of the recognized leaders of the conservative movement. she won the iowa primary and is a thrill to have congresswoman michele bachmann here today. [applause] >> thank you. good morning. any day is a good day when i can be in the same room with phyllis schlafly. i am thrilled to be here. she quite literally got me through all the years when i was a young mother at home. let me start off by saying if there is any advice i have for all of you, it would be this. mary well. find someone that you love. marriage is forever.

you will look at that person a lot of mornings across the breakfast table, so i think long and hard before you actually make that decision. but i am encouraging you, get married and have children and live life, in that order. phyllis has probably been one of the best examples of that, of a woman who really did it all, who lived live very well, who was a mother and wife but also worked her way for college. she worked and she tested ammunition. if anybody could do that, it would be phyllis schlafly. my point is, life is a long process, and we live in segments. one thing i see too many people doing is saying i want to be president. there is nothing wrong with saying that, but get to that

point of living your life, doing something. the best example was last week when our president went out and made the statement that if you build your own business, it isn't you that is responsible for your own success. he was infering that it was government that was the reason behind his success. this shows a window into his soul. it is why he truly doesn't get it about what america is about. i say that because i came from a family where my mom was a single mother. we just had nothing. i had to work my way through college and law school and for my post doctorate program. when my husband and i got married, we did not even on a car. we worked our way to college and graduate school together. we lived on the cheek nonstop. all of our clothes came from garage sales.

we did what americans do who have nothing. you work and you save and you put aside. what you put aside is called capital. that money you can take and try and invest and do something with. we took that money and started our own company. we on to clinics. we started our company and became successful and i became a tax lawyer. i spent a lot of time in the court room litigating tax cases. it was our sleepless nights, i work paying ourselves last, not taking sick time, not having vacation time. we built this. we thank god for it and we thank god for the customers and everything we have, but we know how the free market system works. you don't get that sense at all from the president that he has any clue how the american system works. that is why his policies have been so profoundly dangerous, particularly for you and for

your age. let me give you one statistic from the house budget committee. they said that by the year 2027 -- how many years from now is that? 15 years. calculate how old you will be in 15 years. you are absolutely gorgeous. that take it for granted you are thin, it doesn't last forever. if you are 20 years old right now, in 15 years, you are 35 years old. now consider what they said. by 2027, our economy will effectively shut down. that is not crazy michele bachmann. that is not right wing phyllis schlafly. that is your government saying to you that in 15 years, our economy smothers and shuts down. why? debt accumulation.

really? i came into congress in january 2007. our debt was a little over $8 to go in. now it is almost $16 to again. -- now it is almost $16 trillion. it took less than eight years to double. the reality is that it is your life that will change in the future if we don't get a grip on the spending. one of the key drivers in all of this is the president's health- care plan. that is why this captured the attention of the nation. the senate budget committee also determined that the unfunded net liability of the president's health-care plan will be $17 trillion over the next 75 years. by way of comparison,, social

security is $7 trillion. that has been the big driver that everyone is scared to death we will run have enough money for social security. enough for have social security, we will not have enough money for finding obamacare. that is why this is so important to you. it is your life and you are beginning and your future. i am glad you are here so we can discuss the issues and philosophy. when you leave here, we do not have a lot of time. we have 3.5 months to make this election count. over and over during the presidential election, i said all bark chips are on november 3 that is more true now than ever. i sat in the supreme court chamber when john roberts read his defense from the bench.

the individual mandate, the requirement that just because you breathe in america, you are forced to buy product or service that the government tells you must buy, it means they dictate the price of that service. that is what he ruled. he did that on the basis of the taxing authority, which was the flimsiest portion of that argument that he could. we can answer that question later on legal reasoning. the point is, now more than ever, we have 3.5 months to take our country back. we could spend 3.5 months sitting at seminars, but we don't have time. you need to find a candidate you believe then and what door to door with them. you need to help with phone calls and getting out mail,

whatever needs to be done to win these elections. we have to win the white house. we have to all band together to make it happen. we have to win three more united states senate seats. if we do, the republican vice president and cast the tie vote in the center repeal obamacare and then hold on to the house of representatives. i did make a distinct contribution to the presidential race. i made the appeal of -- the repeal obamacare my central issue. the american people are with us. 70% of the american people want the president's health-care plan either fully repealed or reform. mitt romney has said eyeball to eyeball to me multiple times, i will repeal obamacare. we need to recognize that no matter who our nominee is, and i stand fully behind mitt romney,

we have got to get behind him, even if he is maybe not everything we wanted, he is our guy. i know we can trust him on this issue. it is your future that will be decided in this election. the good news is, an economy can be turned around. the best example is jimmy carter and the disaster he made in the late 1970's. i worked for the jimmy carter campaign. i was in college. i was a democrat when i was in college. i worked on his campaign. he said he was a born-again christian, pro-life, and i worked for him. then i saw what a disaster his policies were. i had my own renaissance when i was in college and i became a republican. i work for ronald reagan in 1980, and i never looked back.

ronald reagan, in a very short time, showed the miracle and the power of the free market system. the economy came roaring back like we had never seen. it can happen again in your life, too. that is why if we do not win the white house, the senate, and the house, we cannot turn the economy around and repeal obamacare. now more than ever we need to have you in this upcoming election. if you have questions, i would be more than happy to take them, and thank you for allowing me to be here today. [applause] >> i am from iowa. we keep talking about repealing obamacare and then replacing it with what? >> today we have a monopoly in all 50 states that the insurance

companies enjoy in those states. of what to break that down and let every american by any health insurance policy they want, anywhere in america, with no minimum federal requirements. i want them to pay for that policy with their own tax-free money, and have true medical malpractice reform. that costs nothing and would drive down the cost of health care for everyone. that is just the beginning, but the answer is getting the federal government out of health care. it is the federal government intervention that has spiked up that cost of health care beyond any reasonable level. when government intervenes, the price goes up. for people your age, a health insurance policy should not cost more than about $30 a month. you spend more than that on music downloads and coffee at starbucks. you can afford your own health

insurance. you do not need your parents to carry you. you can afford $30 a month. but you are subsidizing other people's health care. there are going to you to pay for it. this is just redistribution of wealth through health care. there is a lot more we could say about that. >> you said you practiced law. what advice would you give to people who are about to go to law school? >> study hard. my best advice to every one of you, i assume you are all leaders because you are here in this room. we teach our own children,

leaders of our readers -- leaders are readers. read a wide range of books. i think it is good to go for a wide variety of sources. be very well read. there is a course of the presidential election, i love the debates more than anything. that was my favorite part of the entire process. the best preparation was a lifetime of learning, of reading, and of living. i go back to what i opened with today. live your life. do something with your life. get married, have children, start a business, engage in life. don't ever forget, this is not a dress rehearsal. this is it. this is the main event. this is like. start living it right now. that does not mean just hedonism are engaging in

license. that means get engaged now. you can literally start setting the stage for what the future will be if you get engaged in this election. study hard, and take a wide range of classes in law school. it may be the foundation for a different career. it may be a foundation for something else as well, but it is a great background. >> thank you so much for being here. i am from arizona. you are my congress crushed. >> that is so cool. my kids will not believe it. >> when and why did you decide to run for congress? >> i was in the minnesota state

senate at the time. i do people approach me and say i should really do it. i had no intention of running for the minnesota state senate. i just showed up for a republican endorsement convention. people said, you have got to do this, you have to run. i was a mess that day. i had a torn sweat shirt, i had jeans on. i said i will look like a freak if i run for senate. but they said someone has to challenge this guy. so i said i would put my name in. i got endorsed that day. my husband was not around. this was before cell phones. he came home and it was april fools' day. he found out his wife was endorsed for senate in minnesota. what are you going to do? i had to run.

i ended up being in the minnesota state senate. when people said i should run we really prayed long and hardue because it is a big deal to do something like that. both really believed that this was the right thing to do, so we did it. it is the cost and the sacrifice to your family, but i know that i was prepared for this fight and i had the will and back on for this spot. i have been grateful for the privilege. i represent wonderful people, and all i am doing is bringing their voice and sensibility to the halls of congress. i know it made an important contribution. quite honestly, this is what i think about when i take my voting card and put it in the machine and push the button. i see your faces. i have 28 children invested in

the future, and that is what i am working for. >> i go to southern methodist university in dallas, texas. i would argue i am your biggest supporter. >> please, no fighting. >> do you enjoy court ever get tired of being the liberals number one target? >> the last 48 hours, i have been their number one target again. the latest by that is going on, i sit on the intelligence committee. there are 19 of us and we deal with the nation's classified secrets. something that has been clear under the obama administration is that there has been influence from the brought -- from the muslim brotherhood. we are raising questions of the inspector general to look into it. two weeks ago, the state department violated federal law.

it granted a visa to a member of a foreign terrorist organization from egypt. we listened on our state department website. our state department broke federal law and granted a visa and brought a foreign terrorist into the united states. not only did they bring this terrorist into the united states, they took him to the white house. he had a meeting with the national security council. you do not get any higher than the national security council when dealing with the nation's classified secrets. what did this member of a terrorist organization request when he was in the white house two weeks agon violation of federal law? he requested that we open up our u.s. prisons and released to the world the mastermind of the 1993 world trade center bombing.

we members of congress are just asking a question. why did the state department do this? why is this an outrageous, unbelievable action on the part of the and ministration to allow influenced by the muslim brotherhood at the highest levels of power? why is this going on? we just want to know. for that, msnbc, cnn have been lighting actress in st. we are going after individual personalities and being mean to muslims. this is nothing about being mean to muslims. a lot of muslims are upset about radical terrorism, too. we believe the administration needs to keep the safety and security of the american people #one. that is why i am in trouble now. every day i am in trouble for something.

who cares? >> thank you so much for being here. i will make a couple of comments and then i want to ask a question. i grew up in private schools until a third grade and i went to public school. i feel like the education of our generation is deteriorating under the public-school system. i listen to david barton a couple of weeks ago and he talked about christian fundamental values that were placed in our founding fathers and how our first congress made a bible. i wanted asked, as far as reforming the public schools and moving more toward privatization

of schools, do we have anything going at this point? >> thank you for asking that question. phyllis has been one of the leaders in the united states on the education reform movement. she has been on this issue since the 1950's when she saw the problems come in to american public schools. we have a common bond and love for this issue. we home schooled and sent are volatile children to private christian school. but we are prevented by the state of minnesota from sending our foster children to private christian schools. a was concerned about what i saw on our public schools so as a mother i became involved. the federal government has essentially taken over the public-school classroom. what i said during the presidential race is, were i president, was shut down the federal department of education. they have done nothing to add to the quality, high academic standards of america. they have only brought them

down. the local public school classrooms must be directed by local parents and local teachers and faculty. that is where the emphasis needs to come. there are any number of excellent materials we can use to teach children academically, but i believe very strongly in the high quality of local public schools. bill clinton said american needs to get over its love affair with local control of public schools. we are seeing the end result of the federal government and what happens when they run our public schools. like so many other areas, we need to get the federal government out of running it. they just mess up everything. >> young people like to hear and see how their actions are being represented in politics. he said that romney wants to

repeal obamacare. how exactly is he going to do that? >> i think he is just going to sign the legislation. it will be up to the house and senate to pass the legislation for full-scale repealed. we just put it on his desk and he either sunset or he doesn't. i have no doubt that he will. i think he is a man of his word. this is a very sharp guy. he is an optimistic person. he has proven himself that he knows how to succeed in business. he gets that the public is very upset with obamacare and he will be in geared to the nation when he affixes his signature to that legislation. thank you for asking that question. >> i am from st. louis, missouri. i want to personally thank you for taking those foster children in.

how to our bring the conservative message back to -- >> it goes with the territory. that is where you have to have a titanium spine. when i was a courtroom lawyer, the one thing i found in my life is, in order to succeed, be the best prepared person in the room. that is what you do, be the best prepared person in the room. do your homework. one thing i learned as a program lawyer, i needed to know my opponent's case better than my opponent did. i need to know their case inside and out so that i can answer any question and poke holes in their argument. that served me very well during the course of the presidential debates. i encourage you, be extremely well prepared. if you are going to work with the adoption or foster care, we

are talking about human lives. we want the best possible outcome. the one thing we know is that a child does best in a home with a mom and dad, a stable environment. they don't have to have a lot of money, it is just a stable environment. that is what a child needs. i just put some legislation forward for foster children so they can at least stay in the same schools. [inaudible] i think this is our last question. >> thank you for being here. in retelling amy about being well-prepared. what list of books would you suggest that we've read?

>> everything phyllis schlafly has ever written. the 02 used bookstore and buy it. she is an absolute genius. you are looking at -- you do not know how privileged you are to be in the room with phyllis schlafly. this woman single-handedly moved the nation in the 1970's. no one else, no man in this country did what phyllis schlafly did. that accolade's would take hours to talk about this woman and what she has done for our country. she quite literally is a living legend. you can go to my web site, i think i have a list of books and classics. mark stein has some great contemporary books. and culture has a lot of great

books i would recommend. -- ann coulter. learn american history and heritage. when you know who you are, you fall in love with america. there is no other nation like america. make sure you read our founding documents, the declaration of independence, the constitution and bill of rights. read the federalist papers. began there. that is very easy to do. , office and i will give you more books to read. >> if you want a good lesson in how to deal with the press or professors and so forth, watch michele bachmann on tv. she has no equal in being able to handle hostile questions. we saw that in the debates. we see that in all those

interviews that you give. i wish romney would take lessons from her. you can take lessons by watching it. she is better than anybody else in the country in hamlin a hostile questions and making her point regardless. -- in handling of hostile questions. let's give michele bachmann a hand. >> i had an unfair advantage. when i grew up, i had three brothers and no sisters. that was unparalleled schooling. thank you, everyone. [applause] >> our next speaker is not here yet. at's stand up and take seventh inning stretch. >> russia and china vetoed a un security council resolution imposing sanctions on syria.

tomorrow, we will talk about what is ahead for u.s. policy toward syria with michelle for mulloy. -- michelle flournoy. former federal election commissioner brad smith talks about why he opposes requiring independent campaign groups to disclose where they get their money. washington journal is live every morning on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern. more "road to the white house coverage tomorrow. mitt romney campaigns in new hampshire. that is live on c-span. live at 6:00 p.m. eastern, first lady michelle obama delivered a campaign speech in fredericksburg, virginia. >> this weekend on book tv, from

new york city, the harlem book fair. live coverage starts saturday at 12:30 eastern with a panel discussion on the future of african american publishing. that is followed with a look at public education. cornell west sits on a panel examining the next presidential election. sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern, the eagle forum leadership summit with authors including phyllis schlafly. part of book tv this weekend on c-span2. >> homeland security secretary janet napolitano testified at an oversight hearing today. she answered questions about port security, the fast and furious gun tracking operation, and the administration's policy to call for deportation of some illegal immigrants who came to the country as children.

texas congressman lamar smith chaired the committee. welcome everyone to this hearing and especially secretary napolitano. i recognize myself for the opening statement and then the ranking member. welcome again, secretary napolitano to today's oversight committee hearing of the department of homeland security. dhs is responsible for the enforcement of american immigration laws. under the current administration, the department's seems to work to undermine those laws and has actively worked to make sure that many others do not enforce our immigration laws either.

obama administration officials recently decided to grant amnesty under the guise of deferred action. this unprecedented decision -- exercising its responsibility to see that the laws are faithfully executed, the executive branch does not have the power -- does have the power and prosecutorial discretion on the case by case basis, but it cannot be used to systematically dismantle our immigration laws. the supreme court noted that the president's constitutional power to enforce our laws does not imply that they can forbid their execution. president obama understood this when he admitted last year that "there are laws on the books that congress has passed that it ministration cannot just

suspended deportations through executive order." obama has broken his promise to the american people. the decision to grant administrative and a seat on a mass scale ignores the root ball and the separation of powers. with 23 million americans unemployed or underemployed, this amnesty only makes their lives harder. the obama administration's amnesty is also a magnet for fraud. many illegal immigrants will falsely claim they came to the u.s. is children and this administration refuses to take the steps necessary to check whether their claims are true or not. ti and again that a part of homeland security has gone out of its way to avoid the enforcement of immigration laws. the departed, and security

policy of non enforcement will continue to cost innocent americans their jobs. madam secretary, you also must be extremely concerned about the recent disclosure of national secrets. the methods and sources of intelligence use to protect, and security must be kept strictly secret. when these become public knowledge, american lives become threatened. details include operational details of the bin laden rate, helicon doug cybersecurity, and information about drone strikes. these -- are enemies now know how we will hunt them, which will only make it more difficult. homeland security depends on our ability to keep secrets from those who would attack our homeland. when the secret sleek and become public knowledge, or people and national interest are put in jeopardy. when our enemies and our secrets, american lives are endangered. the government's ability to keep

national security secrets depends on identifying the causes of the leaks in putting a stop to them. that is why have asked to interview senior officials of a have information on how the secrets became public. barbara homeland security has responsibility to deter and prevent terrorists from attacking the united states. to do this, we must protect the details of our intelligence gathering. that concludes my opening statement and the ranking member is recognized for his. >> thank you mr. chairman and welcome, madam secretary. i want to remind you, i meant to do it off the record, but i want to remind the chairman that his opinion is his own, but the facts are not the ones that he controls. i want to announce to him that i am keeping a record of all the things i think are serious misstatements of fact, which i

will be taking either to the floor or publishing otherwise. i think i mentioned this to you before. i think you have given me some work to do already. i would like to say to all the members of this committee, i want this to be a civil hearing in which we exchange views, make criticisms, voice opinions, but i would like it to be done in keeping with the reputation of the house judiciary committee, so that we don't get out of control. i am sure the chairman will agree with me on that. i welcome you, madam secretary,

and i had some issues about some security incidents in detroit, and i would like not to take up our time talking about them here, but i would be looking forward to it, because detroit, it is the largest commercial border crossing in north america, and these threats or of a concern to our country and to canada as well. the other couple of things i wanted to commend you on is the fact that we have improved border security, and having listened to some of my

colleagues, i thought that the border security on the southern end of our country was in bad shape, but border security is more secure than it has ever been before, i think due to increased border enforcement efforts, and unauthorized border crossings for a 40-year low. we have not seen border apprehension numbers this low since 1972. i commend homeland security for that, and if there are other insights that you would like to share with us today, and we have time, i would like to do it. if not, i would like to get more information from you or your

staff. at the same time, immigration removals have been at an all- time high. just short of four hundred thousand last year. what is more impressive is the makeup of the numbers. for the first time ever, persons with criminal convictions made up more than half of those removals. and more than 90% met the administration's enforcement priorities. which includes recent border crossers and repeat violators. so even in the critical shortage of funds and personnel, i think the strategies